[House Hearing, 108 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 102-000 deg.
HEARING ON CAREERS FOR THE 21st CENTURY: THE IMPORTANCE OF EDUCATION
AND WORKER TRAINING FOR SMALL BUSINESS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 2, 2004
__________
Serial No. 108-68
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Small Business
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/ house
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
94-136 WASHINGTON : 2004
_________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois, Chairman
ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland, Vice NYDIA VELAZQUEZ, New York
Chairman JUANITA MILLENDER-McDONALD,
SUE KELLY, New York California
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio TOM UDALL, New Mexico
PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania FRANK BALLANCE, North Carolina
JIM DeMINT, South Carolina ENI FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
SAM GRAVES, Missouri DONNA CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands
EDWARD SCHROCK, Virginia DANNY DAVIS, Illinois
TODD AKIN, Missouri GRACE NAPOLITANO, California
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia ANIBAL ACEVEDO-VILA, Puerto Rico
BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania ED CASE, Hawaii
MARILYN MUSGRAVE, Colorado MADELEINE BORDALLO, Guam
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona DENISE MAJETTE, Georgia
JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania JIM MARSHALL, Georgia
JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine
BOB BEAUPREZ, Colorado LINDA SANCHEZ, California
CHRIS CHOCOLA, Indiana BRAD MILLER, North Carolina
STEVE KING, Iowa [VACANCY]
THADDEUS McCOTTER, Michigan
J. Matthew Szymanski, Chief of Staff
Phil Eskeland, Policy Director
Michael Day, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Witnesses
Page
DeRocco, Hon. Emily Stover, Assistant Secretary of Labor,
Employment and Training Administration......................... 4
Lewis, Hon. Edward G., Chairman, Board of Directors, National
Veterans Business Development Corporation...................... 6
Buehlmann, Dr. Beth B., Ph.D., V.P. and Executive Director, U.S.
Chamber of Commerce............................................ 21
McCarthy, Mr. Brian, Chief Operating Officer, Computer Technology
Industry Association........................................... 23
Joyce, Mr. Roger, V.P. of Engineering, National Association of
Manufacturing.................................................. 25
Volgenau, Dr. Ernst, Chairman and CEO, SRA International......... 28
Coffey, Mr. Matthew B., President and Chief Operating Officer,
National Tooling and Machining Association..................... 30
Peers, Mr. Randolph, V.P. for Economic Development, Brooklyn
Chamber of Commerce............................................ 31
Caslin, Mr. Michael, Executive Director and CEO, National
Foundation for Teaching Entrepreneurship....................... 34
Appendix
Opening statements:
Manzullo, Hon. Donald A...................................... 52
Velazquez, Hon. Nydia........................................ 54
Prepared statements:
DeRocco, Hon. Emily Stover, Assistant Secretary of Labor,
Employment and Training Administration..................... 56
Lewis, Hon. Edward G., Chairman, Board of Directors, National
Veterans Business Development Corporation.................. 67
Buehlmann, Dr. Beth B., Ph.D., V.P. and Executive Director,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce................................... 84
McCarthy, Mr. Brian, Chief Operating Officer, Computer
Technology Industry Association............................ 95
Joyce, Mr. Roger, V.P. of Engineering, National Association
of Manufacturing........................................... 107
Volgenau, Dr. Ernst, Chairman and CEO, SRA International..... 113
Coffey, Mr. Matthew B., President and Chief Operating
Officer, National Tooling and Machining Association........ 131
Peers, Mr. Randolph, V.P. for Economic Development, Brooklyn
Chamber of Commerce........................................ 146
Caslin, Mr. Michael, Executive Director and CEO, National
Foundation for Teaching Entrepreneurship................... 153
(iii)
HEARING ON CAREERS FOR THE 21st CENTURY: THE IMPORTANCE OF EDUCATION
AND WORKER TRAINING FOR SMALL BUSINESS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2, 2004
House of Representatives,
Committee on Small Business
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:08 p.m. in Room
2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Donald A. Manzullo
presiding.
Present: Representatives Manzullo, Velazquez, Bartlett,
Franks, Beauprez, King, Udall, Sanchez
Chairman Manzullo. Good afternoon and welcome to this
hearing of the Committee on Small Business. A special welcome
to those who have come some distance to participate and to
attend the hearing.
Our nation is now in a global economy, and businesses both
big and small must compete in regional markets within the U.S.
as well as those in distant corners of the globe. The
competition for ideas and innovation is as expansive as the
markets themselves.
The U.S. economy is still the strongest in the world. Jobs
and manufacturing are recovering slowly, but the recovery is
broad based, just what we want.
Those who come to Washington for assistance in providing
training, however, must be committed to providing jobs to those
trained and to providing and retaining jobs in the United
States.
However, to maintain this country's competitiveness, we as
a nation cannot dwell on past successes. Instead, we must
accept the challenge of the future and build and preserve a
foundation for continued success.
To continue this country's competitiveness in world markets
requires a workforce constantly trained and available in those
skills needed in an increasingly technology-centered and
computer-based environment. Equally important to playing a
leadership role in the world economy is the education and
foresight of those who manage and direct U.S. businesses. In
order to foster and sustain both this nation's worldwide
competitiveness and domestic job growth, requires making life-
long career training and education a national priority.
My friend and colleague, Congressman Jerry Weller of
Illinois, has introduced legislation, H.R. 4392, that will
assist employers and employees to get those technical skills
necessary to keep this nation's workforce and industries on the
cutting edge of science and technology. H.R. 4392, the
``Technology Retraining and Investment Now Act of 2004,''
addresses the critical problem of providing a high-tech
workforce capable of mastering the ever-changing advances in
the design and manufacture of increasingly sophisticated
products, especially those connected with computers and
information technology.
I strongly support job training and retraining. It is a key
element in this country's maintaining its competitiveness in
world markets. Again, we thank you for coming to this hearing.
I now yield for an opening statement by my good friend and
colleague, the Ranking Member, Ms. Velazquez of New York.
[Chairman Manzullo's statement may be found in the
appendix.]
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As our nation experiences a rising tech industry and a
recovering manufacturing sector, we also see the increased need
for skilled workers. This growing demand for skilled labor is
an increasing trend in this country. As our nation struggles to
sustain an economic recovery, we cannot afford to have a
shortage of qualified trained workers within some of our most
prominent industries. Sixty percent of all jobs are classified
as skilled while only 20 percent are classified as nonskilled.
Our country's failure to meet the demand for these trained
workers poses a serious threat to our competitiveness in the
global market and to our ability to sustain an economic
recovery. Much of this has to do with the fact that the
manufacturing sector has been hit hardest by the shortage. A
recent report stated that more than 80 percent of manufacturers
claim to have difficulty finding qualified employees and that
60 percent of manufacturers typically reject 50 percent of all
applicants because of a lack of skills.
At a time when technology is causing manufacturing jobs to
become increasingly skilled, a high premium has been put on
employee skills. Jobs continue to move overseas, and the Bush
administration's policies are doing little, if anything, to
help this nation's manufacturing sector.
Sadly, the pool of skilled labor is not ready to meet our
nation's demand, especially within the manufacturing sector.
Foreign countries are providing the training that unskilled
employees need, shifting even more American jobs overseas. Our
nation's small businesses and manufacturers do not have the
funding to offer these vital training programs.
In today's hearing, we will examine the eight-week-long
Republican agenda, Hire Workers Initiative. This week's focus
is on lifetime learning, and once again, there are no new
solutions being offered by the Republican leadership aside from
the personal reemployment accounts, which are nothing more than
risky schemes. Instead, the Republicans choose to go back to
legislation that has already passed and already failed, and I
think that it is too soon for summer reruns.
The Bush administration's new job training dynamics are not
conducive to meeting the needs of our nation's industries.
President Bush proposed commitment to hiring workers does not
match up with his actions. Despite the fact that our nation has
lost over 2.8 million jobs in the manufacturing sector since
the start of 2001, the Bush administration makes cuts to vital
employment and training programs that benefit this industry.
President Bush's request for funding for the Manufacturing
Extension program is more than $66 million less than the
program's funding level in 2003. The Manufacturing Extension
program aids small- and medium-sized manufacturers with
technical and business solutions and has made it possible for
over 150,000 of our country's small businesses to tap into the
expertise of knowledgeable manufacturing and business
specialists all over the United States.
Another vital program that has been underfunded by the Bush
administration is the Trade Adjustment Assistance program. This
program offers retraining to displaced workers. But most of
these dislocated manufacturing employees receive no help from
TAA.
At a time when training programs are crucial for displaced
employees, President Bush cut funding for the program. These
come at a time when the number of people benefitting from TAA
is on the rise, and this funding will not meet the increasing
demand for the program. Cutting funding for employment and
training initiatives such as these is not the way to help the
manufacturing sector sustain an economic recovery while they
are already experiencing a shortage of skilled workers. These
cuts also hurt our small businesses which create 75 percent of
all new jobs and face greater workforce-development barriers
than their corporate counterparts.
If President Bush truly cared out about nation's workforce,
then he would start adequately funding employment and training
programs that promote skilled employees. The livelihood of our
nation's small manufacturers and small businesses depends on
it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Manzullo. Thank you.
[Ranking Member Velazquez's statement may be found in the
appendix.]
Our first witness is Emily Stover DeRocco, assistant
secretary of labor for employment and training. We are going to
set the clock for about five minutes, but before we do that, if
you could just take a minute, Secretary DeRocco, to give us an
idea what your background is.
Ms. DeRocco. Certainly.
Chairman Manzullo. And then if you could pull that mike
closer to you. There you are. A little bit closer. Then as soon
as you tell us what your background is, after a minute or so,
then we will start the clock. Is that fair enough?
Ms. DeRocco. Absolutely.
Chairman Manzullo. It will be the same for you, Secretary
Lewis. Please.
Ms. DeRocco. I was appointed to this position by President
Bush in June of 2001 and confirmed in August of that year.
Prior to that, I served for about 10 years as executive
director of the national organization that represented the
gubernatorial appointees across the country responsible for the
full array of employment and training workforce-development
programs within their states. I had previous appointments in
both the administrations of Presidents Reagan and Bush I.
Chairman Manzullo. Okay. Now we will start the clock. Thank
you.
STATEMENT OF EMILY STOVER DeROCCO, EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING
ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Ms. DeRocco. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman and
Congresswoman and members of the Committee. I am very pleased
to have the opportunity to testify today to discuss workforce
issues to maintain the nation's leadership in world markets,
with a particular emphasis on our manufacturing sector,
including how we train and retrain our workers so that they are
competitive in the world economy. I will summarize my written
testimony quickly.
In my capacity as assistant secretary of labor for
employment and training, I am responsible for overseeing the
nation's public workforce investment system, which provides a
vast array of employment and training services to prepare
youth, adults, and workers transitioning between jobs for
employment in the 21st century. Most of these services are
available through a network of almost 2,000 comprehensive, one-
stop career centers and another 1,600 affiliate one-stop
centers network. Through this network system, workers have the
advantage of access to a broad range of employment and training
services, including those available through the one stop that
are provided by our partner programs, some 17 additional
federal programs.
Through our programs and some initiatives that I will
describe in a moment, the Department is building a demand-
driven system to provide America's economic engine, businesses,
with the highest-quality workers possible and to link the two
together for their mutual benefit. This relationship allows
businesses to be more competitive in the global economy and
allows workers to live more productive and prosperous lives.
Earlier this year, the administration submitted to the
Congress a report on manufacturing in America that outlined a
comprehensive strategy to address the challenges facing our
manufacturers. Soon, the Department of Labor will be submitting
its own report highlighting trends in manufacturing employment.
Several themes emerge from these reports. The first
concerns the importance of the manufacturing sector, on which
we can all agree. The United States is the world's leading
producer of manufactured goods and, standing alone, the U.S.
manufacturing sector would represent the world's fifth-largest
economy. Manufacturing remains a powerful engine of economic
growth in this country and is vital to the technology boom, and
our manufacturing base generates enormous economic activity in
other industry sectors.
A second theme concerns the transformation of the
manufacturing sector caused by long-term structural forces,
such as the shift from low-tech manufacturing to advanced
manufacturing, the greater integration of technology and
production, and the globalization of production. To help ensure
solid and sustainable expansion in coming years, we must
recognize that some current and prospective workers have
insufficient skills for the higher skilled job openings that do
exist and will become more numerous in the future.
When I co-chaired the Department of Commerce Manufacturing
Roundtable of workforce issues, I heard directly from industry
executives about skill shortages. One of the most protracted
problems that employers face is the lack of skilled workers to
operate their high-tech manufacturing plants. Even during the
recession, as the Congresswoman cited, 80 percent of
manufacturers said they had a moderate-to-serious shortage of
high-quality production applicants, not just of engineers.
The more pervasive problem is now the need for production
workers, machinists, and craft workers skilled enough to work
in the manufacturing jobs of the 21st century, and the
demographics of the workforce are likely to exacerbate the
shortage of skilled workers in the coming years. American
manufacturers could have a difficult time finding workers to
run tomorrow's factories and offices.
We recognize that skills and education are now a dominant,
if not decisive, factor in our ability to compete in the global
economy. We must have the best-skilled workforce possible to
maintain America's competitive advantage and for our continued
economic growth. That is where the Department of Labor has an
important role to play. Our task is not to cultivate a
workforce trained for jobs listed in last week's want ads but
rather to ensure that people are moving through an education
and training pipeline to be prepared for the new jobs that are
being created, in many cases by brand-new companies in brand-
new industry sectors.
We must cultivate skill sets that connect to real-world
needs and real-world opportunities, and as we strive to be
competitive in the global economy, we also recognize that some
industries and workers will be impacted by business decisions
and competitive pressures, and inevitably some workers will
need to retool and retrain from the skills no longer required
by declining industries to skills demanded in emerging sectors
of the economy. The Department provides a vast array of
services to assist workers who are transitioning between jobs,
and these are outlined in detail in my prepared statement.
The president has asked the Department of Labor to target
those industries generating the most new jobs where the
greatest skill shortages exist and focus on the talent base to
fill those jobs. American manufacturing is among those sectors.
As we increase our understanding of these workforce
challenges, we also must improve the responsiveness of the
publicly funded workforce investment system, and we are
committed to doing that. First, through the reauthorization of
the Workforce Investment Act, we have proposed increased
flexibility and effectiveness of our training programs.
Second, in his 2005 budget, the president has requested an
additional $250 million to strengthen the role of community and
technical colleges in training workers for these jobs.
Third, personal reemployment accounts would offer
additional funds for a different type of service delivery
geared to an individual's needs to reattach to the employment
market.
And, finally, in April, President Bush announced his
proposal to further reform job-training programs to provide
more dollars for America's workers so they could access better
training for better jobs.
Taken together, our current programs and proposed
initiatives will provide important tools to help address the
structural changes in the manufacturing industry and will also
help provide the skilled workforce needed in the manufacturing
industry of the 21st century. I would be pleased to answer any
questions you or other Committee members may have after the
conclusion of my------.
[Hon. DeRocco's statement may be found in the appendix.]
Chairman Manzullo. Thank you very much.
Our next witness is Honorable Edward G. Lewis, chairman of
the board, National Veterans Business Development Corporation,
also known as ``The Veterans Corporation.'' Mr. Lewis, we look
forward to your testimony, but before we start the clock, just
give us a minute, take a minute, and tell us about your
background.
Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have been on the
board of directors of the Veterans Corporation since October
2001, having been appointed by President Bush, and was elected
as chairman in December. Currently, I founded and run an
international management and technology consulting company from
the great State of Colorado. I am also heavily involved in
teaching graduate and undergraduate courses at the University
of Denver and the University of Colorado and have been doing
both of these activities over the past 12 years.
Prior to that, I was assistant secretary for information
resources management and the first chief information officer in
the new Department of Veterans Affairs between 1989 and 1991.
Prior to that, I served in the United States Marine Corps for
just under 21 years.
Chairman Manzullo. Okay. We look forward to your testimony.
Mr. Lewis. Thank you very much.
Chairman Manzullo. Do you see how that brings things into
perspective, knowing that you are a Marine for 21 years and on
the veterans board, you know. Very significant.
Mr. Lewis. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Manzullo. Now we will start the clock. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF EDWARD G. LEWIS, NATIONAL VETERANS BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Mr. Lewis. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the Committee. Thank you very much for your
invitation to testify today. This is my first appearance before
your Committee, and I am deeply honored to have this
opportunity, particularly since your Committee is one of the
congressional authorization committees for the National
Veterans Business Development Corporation.
As chairman of the board, as a private citizen, and as an
entrepreneur, and as a longtime educator, I commend the
leadership role that this Committee is providing and strongly
support your efforts to bring focus on these critical education
and training issues. Today, my comments on education and
training are primarily focused on one group of individuals in
this country, our veterans, including service-disabled
veterans, but more specifically, on those veterans who are
involved in entrepreneurial endeavors and small business
enterprises.
Let me focus on five issues from my written testimony.
First, in my view, entrepreneurship is alive and well in this
country. The self-employed, home-based businesses and small
business enterprises are, in fact, the backbone of this
nature's economic infrastructure, vitality, and strength. Many
people in this country, including veterans, own small
businesses and contribute significantly to domestic job growth,
the overall productivity of this nation, and its competitive
posture in the global marketplace. To be successful
entrepreneurs, veterans must gain in-depth knowledge needed to
succeed in both the start-up and growth phases of small
business entrepreneurial activities. This knowledge can be
gained through effective entrepreneurial education, mentoring,
and counseling, not on a one-time basis but on a learning
continuum throughout the life of the entrepreneurial activity.
Second, there is no question that future technology
innovation and information technologies are extremely important
for organizations to remain competitive in the world's markets
to help support job creation and growth and to meet our future
challenges. To leverage the strategic value of information
technologies within our organizations, we need to ``informate''
our organizations, not automate them.
To evolve an Information Age society requires more
effective education and training, including entrepreneurial
education throughout our society. This education and training
must begin at an early age and become a significant part of
lifelong learning for all individuals as well as for and within
organizations. It must become all encompassing to be effective.
Third, congressional intent was and is clear within Public
Law 106-50 passed in August 1999. Entrepreneurial, veteran-
owned, small business enterprises are critical to this nation
and to our national economic viability. We must and should, as
a nation, support veterans in their entrepreneurial endeavors
to provide them the necessary resources and capabilities to
help them grow and build their small business enterprises. To
be successful in supporting veteran entrepreneurship, the
Veterans Corporation, established under Public Law 106-50, must
facilitate and coordinate public and private resources in a
dynamic collaborative effort across this country in order to
provide veterans with the necessary resources and capabilities
to build and grow their small business enterprises, including
entrepreneurial education, mentoring, and counseling.
Fourth, we are currently working with the Association of
Small Business Development Centers and the VA Center for
Veteran Entrepreneurship to help facilitate implementation of
the provisions of the recently passed Public Law 108-183 that
can provide service members and veterans who have Montgomery GI
Bill benefits with funding to pay for entrepreneurial education
courses. I also want to recognize and fully support the recent
Veterans Earn and Learn Act to help modernize on-the-job
training and apprenticeship programs reflecting today's
marketplace.
Fifth, and finally, the Veterans Corporation is currently
in the initial stage of developing and evaluating a concept
referred to as the National Veterans Entrepreneurial Education
Initiative. The overall goal is to provide high-quality
entrepreneurial education in the most cost-efficient and
effective manner possible to as many veterans as possible,
including Reserve and Guard personnel. The intent of this
national initiative is to develop and provide a strategic
vision and strategic leadership at the national level, building
a coalition of private and public organizations for effective
implementation of this initiative at the local level. The
strategic initiative would include an all-encompassing,
comprehensive, lifelong entrepreneurial learning continuum to
include a wide range of formal and informal entrepreneurial
education, training, mentoring, and counseling, and assistance
for veterans in full support of their entrepreneurial endeavors
and small business activities.
In summary, we in the Veterans Corporation are proud of our
efforts over the past 20 months in providing effective
entrepreneurial education to veterans, including service-
disabled veterans. Many of us also realize that for the
Veterans Corporation to be truly successful in helping
entrepreneurial veterans over the long term, we must be able to
develop and deliver effective programs and services, including
collaborative, cooperative partnerships that are unique and
that directly support veteran entrepreneurship, including a
dynamic, all-encompassing, lifelong-learning approach to
entrepreneurial education, mentoring, and counseling. In this
way, the Veterans Corporation can effectively support the goals
of this Committee.
Again, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the Committee, for this opportunity to express my
views. I now would be pleased to answer any of your questions.
[Hon. Lewis' statement may be found in the appendix.]
Chairman Manzullo. Thank you. I appreciate the testimony.
We have a unique situation in Rockford, Illinois. Our
unemployment just fell below 10 percent for the first time in
probably two years, and we are excited about that. No new
manufacturing jobs have been added, but we continue to lose
them. Illinois is one of four states that continues to lose
manufacturing jobs at a lower pace than before. At the same
time, we have a unique situation where people involved in
manufacturing have placed ads in the newspaper advertising for
machinists.
Secretary DeRocco, you have a smile on your face that you
have heard that situation before. Tell us what is going on. Can
you take a guess at it? I have got an idea, but I would like to
hear your ideas.
Ms. DeRocco. The dynamics of each local labor market are so
different, but there is a certain skill requirement in the
machinist's trade that is not necessarily available in the
manufacturing workforce as we have known it in the past. That
is why it is so critical for this public workforce system to
get smart by talking first with businesses and those who are
creating jobs and have jobs available to understand what skills
workers need so that we are investing this vast amount of
public resources in training to those skills so that the
workers can make transitions to jobs that are available as
quickly and effectively as possible.
We also, through reauthorization of the Workforce
Investment Act, have encouraged Congress to make available more
of the resources for incumbent worker training so that if there
is a shift in a production process or in skill sets needed by a
workforce before they are laid off, these resources can be
brought to bear on behalf of those workers while they are still
employed, and we do not experience more periods of
unemployment.
It is a skills mismatch and job availability that this
system, acting as a smart intermediary that brings business and
workers together effectively with the educational institutions,
that can provide the training most effectively, and would make
this a wise investment of public resources and a much more
important system to local economies.
Chairman Manzullo. That is good analysis. Just a couple of
things I want to throw out, and either you want to comment on
them or not touch them; that will be up to you.
Maybe 50 years ago, 40 or 50 years ago, a bunch of people
involved in education in this country sat down decided that
there was something intrinsically wrong with people who work in
shops and that machine oil was not good, that to be a
successful person, you had to go to a four-year college and get
a degree, and that has resulted in what I consider in this
country to be an anti-manufacturing culture, that people like
my father, who was a skilled machinist before he became a
skilled butcher, skilled carpenter, and a skilled restaurateur,
back in those days, they all worked with their hands. I looked
upon the fruit of his hands with great pride.
And then the technical schools and the high schools decided
to scale back the classes--we called them machine shops and
woodworking and automotive repairs--because the demand went
down. Kids got it in their head that perhaps there was
something more to life than working with your hands. And then
the technical schools became centralized so the people that
were going to go to college stayed at their high school, and
those that were going to go into manufacturing or the
``industrial arts,'' as it was called, were bussed to a central
location. Thus, you had a segregation and a division in this
country. Would either of you like to comment on that?
Ms. DeRocco. I would love to.
Chairman Manzullo. I think that Mr. Lewis has a thought on
that, too. I saw him nodding his head. Go ahead.
Ms. DeRocco. Okay. We will both comment. It is true that we
have experienced something of a college culture in the United
States, and both the Department of Education and the Department
of Labor recognize that as we look at the jobs that are being
created and available. Believing that all young people and
transitioning workers need a strong academic foundation to
succeed in almost any field of endeavor and supporting
education fully for that reason, we also have launched an
initiative we call ``Skills To Build America's Future'' that we
hope will re-lift the attention to and the respect for the
skilled crafts and trades that are prominent in so many of our
growth sectors, starting with construction and moving into
manufacturing.
Many of the skills that are being developed or that need to
be developed to support occupations and careers in these fields
have long career pathways and lifelong education and training
opportunities, and certainly we in the public workforce system
need to support those better. We think we need to do it in
partnership with the educational system with a new vision of
what vocational education in this country and career
opportunities are all about. We have begun that effort, and I
would be eager to share more information about that with you.
Chairman Manzullo. Mr. Lewis?
Mr. Lewis. I have several points that I would like to make.
One, with reference to whether or not it takes a college
education to succeed out there, I think Bill Gates, Michael
Dell, and Tiger Woods are examples where it does not, not to
demean the college education. It has its proper place as does
all sorts of different training opportunities, and we should
not dismiss any of these.
Second, with regard to the classroom environment, two
things I would like to point out, at least in my experience,
and I think I have a fair amount in terms of teaching, in
business schools, across the board in this country, there is
not an emphasis on manufacturing in the business schools. There
is maybe a course here and there but certainly not a dedicated
emphasis which we have general courses, and I think that
certainly is something that should be considered. How can we
evolve that type of environment in order to effectively support
people moving into the manufacturing environment?
Third, I also want to emphasize that one of the keys to
success in our organizations, including manufacturing, is
clearly the role of information technologies. However, in terms
of the educational process, I think in many cases we sometimes
do a disservice in terms of educating people in information
technologies by focusing just on the technologies themselves
and not in terms of the strategic value they provide to
organizations.
This is an issue that needs to be emphasized within all
aspects of education and particularly in the university
environment. Regardless of course, whether it is accounting,
whether it is operations management, whether it is finance, the
role of information technology is extremely important as
students then take that knowledge to the private sector in
terms of their jobs, whether it is in service or manufacturing.
In order to be effective, though, in those jobs, they need to
better understand the role of information technology.
Chairman Manzullo. Thank you. Congresswoman Velazquez?
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. DeRocco, you mentioned that the president increased
funding for the workforce development programs, but, in fact,
the administration Fiscal Year 2005 budget reduces funding for
such programs as Perkins, Manufacturing Enterprise program,
ATP, to name a few. I have here a chart prepared by CRS with
all of the programs, and when you add them up, the total cut is
$125 million. So how are we going to close the skill gap to
address the training needs of our workforce when you are not
supplying the resources that we need?
Ms. DeRocco. I am not familiar with the chart you have in
front of you. Our budget reflects that our 2005 request for
training and employment services under the Workforce Investment
Act is, in fact, an increase from the 2004 level of
appropriations, so I would be interested in comparing those
numbers with you.
Ms. Velazquez. I guess that the administration has a
conflict between your numbers and the ones that are supplied by
CRS. That is the congressional research office.
Ms. DeRocco. Our training and employment services budget
for the Employment and Training Administration, which leads the
workforce investment system, is $3.279 billion for adults in
2005, compared to a $3.129 billion appropriation in 2004.
I would also mention that, in terms of funding for the
Trade Adjustment Assistance program, which you mentioned, we
are providing $220 million, which is the statutory cap for
training, in that program. As you know, it is a capped
entitlement, so the amount available is what Congress makes
available, which is $220 million------.
Ms. Velazquez. You are not adding in your numbers those cut
by the Department of Education within the Department of
Education. That is why you get those numbers.
Ms. DeRocco. In terms of the first question, you mentioned
Perkins, which is at the Department of Education, and the
Manufacturing Extension Partnerships, which are at the
Department of Commerce, I did want to mention to you, as it
relates to the Manufacturing Extension Partnerships, that we
are working very closely with the MEPs in the president's high-
growth, job-training initiative in advance manufacturing
because in many communities they are a partner in new projects
that bring together business, education, and the public
workforce system and are receiving funding through the
Department of Labor in addition to their appropriated level. So
I just wanted you to be aware of those projects that we are
working on because MEPs can be very important components of a
community's economic-development plan when there continues to
be a strong manufacturing presence.
Ms. Velazquez. May I?
Ms. DeRocco. Absolutely.
Ms. Velazquez. Yes. Here you are telling me that you are
working with all of the MEPs, but when we look at the budget,
the president zeroed out the budget for that.
Ms. DeRocco. Again, I am not familiar with the Department
of Commerce budget specifically. I did not believe that they
were zeroed out. I just wanted you to know that there are
additional cross-agency partnerships and funding opportunities
that the MEPs------.
Ms. Velazquez. Can we talk for a second about the Jobs for
the 21st Century Initiative----
Ms. DeRocco. Certainly.
Ms. Velazquez [continuing] That represents the hallmark of
the administration in terms of job training? An editorial in
the Minneapolis Star Tribune found that funding for the Labor
Department's key worker training programs have fallen by 10
percent since the president took office. Could you please
explain how the president's plan will compensate for these
cuts?
Ms. DeRocco. Well, again, I cannot hold the Minneapolis
Tribune up as an expert on the federal budget. According to our
budgets, there has not been a 10 percent cut in terms of any of
the funding for the workforce investment programs at the
Department of Labor. I will say the president has added $250
million for a community college initiative that will add
training opportunities for workers. He has also requested
authorization for a $50 million additional investment in
personnel reemployment accounts, which is not a cut in any
other program but is, instead, an opportunity to add a new
service-delivery option in the one-stop career center system.
Ms. Velazquez. When it comes to numbers, coming from the
administration--I do not know if you recall the debate on
Medicare prescription drugs, numbers that were sent to us, and
then after we passed the legislation and we voted on, we
discovered that the White House was telling us that the numbers
were not the numbers that they submitted to us. When it comes
to the numbers, I really believe what CRS is sending us, and
what it shows is that there is a cut in those workforce
training programs within the federal government at a time when
we need to provide resources because if we are saying that
small businesses are the job creators, and I think that is what
the president tell us when he goes around and visits small
manufacturing business people, well, you know, we need to
provide the resources to help them, and we are not. We are
cutting them, according to the CRS.
Ms. DeRocco. Again, I would also like to draw your
attention and would like to share with you another set of
numbers that we feel very strongly about, the strong investment
in the workforce investment system and continue that
investment. As you know, more than 80 percent of the dollars
through the Workforce Investment Act are sent by formula down
to the states and subsequently to local areas. Virtually every
state of the union has carried over resources from one year to
the next, resources that they have not been able to spend yet,
and as long as that continues to be part of this system's
financial-management picture, in tight budget situations, both
the Congress and the administration seek to balance the
availability of funds for programs.
Ms. Velazquez. Let us talk about the states for a second.
Can you please explain the Department of Labor's rule change
which ended the practice of states bundling small groups of
laid-off workers to reach the threshold of 50 employees needed
to access national emergency grant funds?
Ms. DeRocco. That actually was an incorrect press article
as well that has appeared in several newspapers. This is in
relation to the national emergency grants, which is a small
proportion of the dislocated worker funds------.
Ms. Velazquez. A lot of newspapers across the nation got
the wrong information.
Ms. DeRocco. The newspapers often get information wrong. It
is, in fact, still the policy of the Department of Labor that
there can be bundling, as I believe you called it, where there
is a community-wide impact by layoffs within an industry sector
or across industries, and the policy of the Department is
clear. I would be glad to share with you the guidance that was
issued.
Ms. Velazquez. Will that apply to everybody or just rural?
Ms. DeRocco. I am sorry. Just whom?
Ms. Velazquez. Rural, rural communities.
Ms. DeRocco. Just rural communities. The ability to go
cross-industry is specifically attributable to rural areas.
Ms. Velazquez. So what about nonrural communities?
Ms. DeRocco. Again, the formula dislocated worker program
dollars are available in every local community through their
local workforce investment boards to provide exactly the same
services for workers who are impacted in very small numbers
throughout country, and there continue to be formula dislocated
worker funds available to serve those workers. National
emergency grants are an additional, supplemental source of
funds for the larger dislocations, and in the case of rural
communities, for a larger number of people when across
industries or across sectors there is a layoff impact.
Chairman Manzullo. Congressman Beauprez?
Mr. Beauprez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to
thank both of our witnesses.
Secretary DeRocco, I would like to comment on something you
brought up. The Community College Initiative and the personal
reemployment accounts, I think, are very good solutions. The
community college network out my way is doing a tremendous
amount of good work.
We did not rehearse this, but I want to go down the avenue
that was started by the chairman. I think many times when we
talk about reemploying or retraining a workforce, we are
talking about solving a problem that has already been created,
to a degree, and I would like to see if we cannot lessen the
number of problems out there.
The avenue that the chairman started down, I reflect often
on the school when I went there, and we did have industrial
arts, and we did have some practical training classes
available. I am all for higher ed. Four of my kids have taken
advantage of it. I took advantage of it, and I want to get as
many doctors and professionals out there as we can possibly
get, but I think the place that we are really falling down as a
society are the many, many, many people that do not feel that
that is where they are headed. And as a result, I have talked
to a lot of school principals right in my district--I think of
Jose Martinez at Jefferson High School there in Edgewater, and
he put it very well. He said, I have got to find a way, a
purpose, for these young boys and girls, these young men and
women, to stay in school, and he said, I am struggling to give
them that reason. What is the goal? What is the objective? And
too often, they are out on the street because they see that as
their path to the future.
He started a nurse-certification program in his school. He
is thinking of bringing industrial arts back.
Now, the Community College Initiative, the personal
reemployment accounts, if you will allow me, I see that as
incentivizing a change in behavior, maybe to coin a phrase. Is
there a better way we, as a society, use the Department of
Labor? You, Mr. Lewis, I think one of the benefits of being a
veteran is you learn how to do things while you are in service
to the country. Is there a better way we ought to be
incentivizing or providing the tools earlier in life for a
broader perspective education? My dad got to eighth grade, but
he was never out of work a day in his life because he used
these. That is a pretty noble progression. If you work with
your hands, it still works for me. Do either of you have ideas
you would share with this Committee?
Ms. DeRocco. Clearly, my colleagues at the Department of
Education, clearly, both of us believe, the Department of Labor
and the Department of Education, that there needs to be far
better career information available to young people and to
transitioning workers, knowledge about what is becoming
available in the 21st century economy. There are career
opportunities, jobs that we did not think of when we were in
school and had never heard of, and they are being created every
day.
There is some responsibility on the part of the Department
of Education and the Department of Labor to connect the world
of work, the realities of education and the various pathways
that are available in a post-secondary- education world. The
post-secondary alternative should be expanded to create
additional pathways to the full array of careers and
occupations that are growing and available to our young people
and workers, and I think my first recommendation would be that
we take a much stronger role together in connecting the world
of education and the world of work through good career
information and leading to the kinds of guidance that will
allow individuals to choose their own pathways and access these
resources that are available to them to help them along those
pathways.
Mr. Lewis. I think this is a very, very important issue,
and I think it is in a broader context, a broader issue that
goes much beyond the educational environment. On one hand, when
we talk about hands, I would put it in a different perspective
and say that the mind is a wonderful thing if we properly
evolve our capabilities to assess issues and be able to use our
mind properly. What I mean by that is, all too often in my
experience in education, we seem to just be going through the
motions.
I have a very personal view, for example, in terms of what
a trend is in this country, for example, in distance learning,
online education. Having taught, as I said, over 350 courses, I
take a very personal view in establishing a very personal bond
with each of my students, and I think education is all about
that because that emanates from your home, it emanates from
your family, and that is where it all begins. And so when I
look at the educational models that we have out there, I become
very concerned that we are distancing our teachers from our
students.
On one hand, I think that to be successful, to be able to
reach out, to be able to work with the individual students to
cultivate them, to imbue them, because I can only relate to my
experiences growing up as a young man, that it is those
teachers that took the time to work with me, to encourage me,
not through a computer, not through, you know, go enter into
some classroom, and you become a part of a group of people, but
to truly work with me as an individual. That is where I think
that our educational models have gone wrong. I think that our
education, we should go back to the focus that it is a
relationship that exists or that develops between the mentor,
the teacher, as well as that student.
Chairman Manzullo. Mr. Udall?
Mr. Udall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the panel
for being here today.
I think you will agree with me that the real creators of
jobs are small businesses. I do not think there is any doubt
about that. And so, knowing that, we should want to get these
programs that deal with the issues you are testifying about--
education, worker training--to small businesses, and that is
very important. And there is kind of a disturbing trend here,
it looks to me, and my question, I guess, is going to the
Department of Labor and to the assistant secretary, but you may
have an additional comment on this.
The SBA's Office of Advocacy conducted two studies that
looked at workforce development in small business in 1992 and
2001. The studies found that among firms with less than 25
employees the percentage who had heard of government training
programs was cut in half, from 49.8 percent to 24.2 percent
from 1992 to 2001. What I would like to know from the assistant
secretary is what initiatives has the Department of Labor
undertaken to correct this problem and increase outreach to
small businesses. Can you tell us specifically what resources
have been used to address this shortcoming?
Ms. DeRocco. That is a very important shortcoming you have
identified, congressman, and I would agree with you that the
public workforce system and its resources should be known by
small businesses and should be accessed by small businesses. As
you know, this is a system that has devolved so that local
workforce investment boards really oversee the service delivery
system in communities, the one-stop career centers, and those
local workforce boards are appointed by mayors or county
officials, and it is through those boards that there should be
broader outreach into the community and marketing of the
services that are available. We really do not have as much of a
direct federal role other than to encourage the------.
Mr. Udall. So your answer would be the Department of Labor
itself has not dedicated any resources to this kind of outreach
that I am talking about.
Ms. DeRocco. I guess that is not correct. We do have a
partnership with the Small Business Administration specifically
to work in communities and have dedicated some demonstration
resources from our national activities programs to reach into
communities and create small business opportunities,
entrepreneurial training, and the kind of business training
that many small businesses need initially.
We also have a national business engagement consortium that
is a number of states that we fund to create marketing
materials to be used nationally by the one-stop career centers
and the local boards for both small and large businesses.
Washington State chairs that national business consortium. And
we have full partnerships through which we also have financial
support with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National
Association of Manufacturers to reach out to the small
businesses within their memberships to better connect those
small businesses with the public workforce system in
communities around the country. I could tally the resources
attributed to this and get that to you later, if you would
like.
Mr. Udall. And do you believe that you have dedicated the
kind of resources to turn this around? I mean, this is a pretty
dramatic drop in a ten-year period, from 49 percent to 24
percent.
Ms. DeRocco. I am not familiar with that particular survey,
but I would say nationally we have a minimal amount of
resources that are held nationally in this workforce investment
system. The majority of the resources are at the state and
local level. This certainly is an area that we work closely
with our state and local partners to ensure--have we done
enough? Probably not.
Mr. Udall. Okay. Well, I certainly think the Committee
would be interested in the dollar amounts and the specifics of
what you have dedicated.
The same study also found that the percentage of small
businesses that have ever used government training programs
dropped from 15.9 percent to 4.5 over the same period. I am
running out of time here, but if you could also try to let us
know what the resources were that were dedicated to turning
that around.
Ms. DeRocco. Absolutely.
Mr. Udall. Thank you.
Chairman Manzullo. Congressman Bartlett?
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. I am sorry I could not have been
here for your testimony. In a former life, I spent 24 years
teaching in technical areas. I also worked in the business
world. I worked eight years for IBM.
We face two problems in our country that I do not know the
answer to, and maybe you can help. When I was with IBM, we were
concerned that we at IBM and we as a country were at high risk
of losing our superiority in computers to Japan. I left there
in '75, to give you some context for the time. For a very
simple reason, we noted that every year Japan turned out more,
and at least as good, scientists, mathematicians, and engineers
as we did in this country, and we at IBM understood that if
that trend continued, we were not going to maintain our
superiority in computers.
For the short term, our inability to attract bright young
people to these pursuits is a risk to our superiority in
economics. For the longer term, it puts us at risk for our
military superiority. It will not continue to have the world's
best military unless we turn out scientists, mathematicians,
and engineers in large enough numbers. If you go to our
technical schools today, you will notice that probably a
majority of the young people who are there studying are not
citizens of this country.
A second problem we have is attracting people to go into
skilled areas where they do things with their hands, and today
you have to be pretty bright to go along with that also. We now
are importing these kinds of skilled people because we cannot
produce them through our education system. One of the problems
is that you get what you appreciate, and I notice that the
White House is not inviting academic scholars and appreciating
them the way they invite athletic figures and appreciate them.
And I am wondering what your suggestions are as to what we can
do as a society to attract more of our bright young people to
go into science, math, and engineering.
By the way, today, they are increasingly going into what I
consider potentially destructive pursuits. Now, we need a few
of each of these, but more and more our best and brightest
young people are going into careers in law and political
science. Now, we need a few lawyers, and we need a few
political scientists, and we have got more than a few of each
of those. What is your suggestion as to how we might capture
the imagination of our population and inspire our young people
to go into these technical careers? I think this is what really
puts us at risk in our competition with the rest of the world.
Ms. DeRocco. We both have ideas. It is a little outside
probably both our bailiwicks in terms of direct jurisdiction
over programs, but, again, I would emphasize that in our work
through the High Growth Job Training Initiative, in all
sectors, from aerospace and advanced manufacturing to
information technology and the emerging sectors of
biotechnology and geospacial technology, without exception in
these forums, executives and educators have pointed to exactly
the issues you have pointed to. Number one, we need to excite
the young people, which I think we do, first and foremost, by
providing information about the careers and the opportunities
for growth and prosperity in those careers. We do not do enough
of that as a nation, and we have joined together at the
Department of Education and the Department of Labor to do that.
I think that is critically important.
Interestingly, one of the recommendations that came from
one of the forums in which the president's science adviser,
John Marberger, participated was precisely your recommendation
to have a very specific recognition program, recognition of
excellence, for individuals in the engineering, math, and
sciences fields to elevate once again, as we have in the past
through the space program, the creativity and the ingenuity of
our people to choose their own paths into these fields of
endeavor that are so needed in every sector of our economy.
Government should not choose pathways for young people or
transitioning workers; that is an individual choice. We do have
a responsibility to provide good information, to get that
information in the hands of those who can make their own
decisions about their pathways, and I think that is something
that the Department of Education and the Department of Labor
are now doing.
Mr. Lewis. I think there are some very interesting issues
here with regard to how do we motivate people to want to spend
a career in these types of, as you refer to, doing things with
your hands, but more specifically, with scientists and
engineers. I was first educated as an aerospace engineer.
Part of the problem, I think, as a society as a whole, in
the past, let us say, since the 1996 time frame with the dot
com boom and the focus that we have seen in this country where
everybody thinks they can get rich quick by doing certain
things that tends to take away from that type of emphasis on
what I would call those really substantive types of areas in
terms of education for science and engineering.
But I think, on the other hand, when you look at the
educational environment, and when we talk about mentoring and
we talk about counseling, I think, both in our educational
systems, secondary systems, but also at the university level,
and then even more important, out in businesses, one of the
things that I have seen that we have lost, and that is the
whole concept--I will put it this way--that businesses,
companies, working with their individual employees in terms of
career development,--there are exceptions out there, but
because of layoffs, because of downsizing, because of those
types of issues and the factors that have put so much pressure
on companies to not focus on their people, I think, has been a
detriment in terms of this educational focus, and I would argue
that we need a return to that. We need to have a more personal
touch in working with our people and helping them to develop
and focus on their careers.
Chairman Manzullo. Congressman Franks?
Mr. Franks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the
panel here.
Secretary DeRocco, I know that a lot of times government's
approach is to find the need, to find the desired outcome, and
to try to put our heads together and come up with the best
strategies in the planning and training that we can to
precipitate that outcome. I am remembering some experiences in
state government, and one of the things was it seemed that we
were basically reverse oriented at times, and by that, I mean
that we studied the problem rather than the successes.
And I am just wondering if there are any models that you
are working on that, whatever the job necessities are, if you
go and find the young people or the people that are
successfully making transitions from another career or from,
say, the loss of a job, to that new job, and they do everything
that can possibly be done to not only amplify their success but
to try to replicate their success and other people's
circumstances. Because it seems to me that with the economy,
even as complex as it is, and with human behavior, as much more
complex as that is, there is almost a genetic code to crack
here. Certain behavior is kind of inborn and innate, and we
would do far better spending time to try to cooperate with that
and to try assist that, and I am just wondering, are there
models to try to study successes, whether it is young people or
whether it is veterans, or whoever that are successfully going
into these new career opportunities and trying to replicate
their successes?
I was the Director of the Governor's office for children in
Arizona, and when we began to think that way, we had a great
deal more success. We studied successful kids, and we found
some very basic commonalities, and when we tried to cooperate
and incent those qualities in others, we had a lot more
success, and I am just wondering if that has any bearing here.
Ms. DeRocco. Hugely, and it is exactly what we are doing
through the president's High Growth Job Training Initiative. We
are building on successes in communities where a partnership
among employers with jobs and knowledge of what skill standards
are needed for workers to be successful in those jobs partner
with the educational institutions so that we can create the
capacity to enlarge the training available to more workers in
those partnerships with our public workforce investment system,
which is the source of the human capital.
We look for those partnerships. We are providing incentives
through additional funds to grow those partnerships and to
replicate them in other communities across the nation. We are
also going to highly publicize, through a Web site for the
workforce system for all educational institutions and for
businesses across America, exactly how these partnerships are
put together so that the investment of taxpayer dollars that is
devolved through our state and local workforce investment
partners can replicate these successes.
So you are absolutely on point. This is the way we make
sure that our system responds to success and does not get
bogged down in failure.
The other point I wanted to make is that the small amount
of national dollars available to the Department of Labor in
this devolved system for models and demonstrations nationally
are specifically used to model successes in other areas of the
country, and we have partnered workforce boards, which are the
oversight bodies for our entire service delivery system, in
areas where they are successful and meeting high employment
retention and earnings gains goals, with workforce boards that
have not quite gotten there yet, and this peer-to-peer sharing
of successes that is now occurring is very exciting and having
great results in building the capacity of the system, raising
the bar for the whole system, and its contribution to making
more happen for more workers and more businesses across
America.
Mr. Lewis. If I may for the next 30 seconds, we, the
Veterans Corporation, in the programs that we are starting in
terms of training, entrepreneurial education, we are definitely
looking at success models, both in terms of Robert Morris
University in Pittsburgh and what we are trying to accomplish
in Colorado as well as South Florida, and, in addition, a new
concept called ``community-based organizations,'' where we have
pilot tests going on in St. Louis as well as Pittsburgh. Both
of those efforts, in terms of entrepreneurial education and
community-based organizations, are going to provide us the
successful templates to carry this throughout the country.
Mr. Franks. Thank you, folks, and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Manzullo. Mr. King?
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I regret I was not here
to hear the bulk of your testimony. However, I would reference
in your written testimony, at least, Ms. DeRocco, you make
reference to an increasing number of non-English speakers and
that language skill is becoming a greater and greater problem.
I am curious about this in a number of different ways, but
one of them would be things that are brought to my attention,
that we are having American citizens that are maybe second
generation that are not picking up the language skills. Would
you have any experience with that or any insight into that?
Ms. DeRocco. I know that that is true, and this is an area
where we are building a strong partnership with the Department
of Education and the Adult Education program because a
significant percentage of individuals who are accessing the
adult education programs around the country are second-
generation Americans who still have language and literacy
issues, and that is impacting their ability to access
employment and career ladders. So we need a much stronger
connection and much more effective programs.
Mr. King. Could you explain that phenomenon, how a person
can be born in the United States and reach working age and not
have English language skills to the point where it is difficult
in the manufacturing process to communicate with someone who is
a second-generation American?
Ms. DeRocco. I wish I could explain the phenomenon. You
would think that our public education system, if the young
people are moving through it, would have attained a level of
language and literacy skills------.
Chairman Manzullo. Secretary, could you pull the mike a
little bit closer?
Ms. DeRocco. Certainly. Absolutely. I am sorry.
Chairman Manzullo. Thank you.
Ms. DeRocco. This is an area where our educational system
needs to focus far more dramatically.
We also are making the Workforce Investment Act resources
available for additional language and literacy training as
opposed to vocational training because there is clearly a need
in many sectors of the economy.
Mr. King. But I understand that with regard to people who
come here without language skills. I am just going to say, I
believe it is something far deeper in second-generation people
who do not attain those skills. I am seeing Mr. Lewis with a
little bit of animation on this, so I would like to hear from
you, Mr. Lewis, on that.
Mr. Lewis. I have a very specific comment. I am the
recipient of what comes from the secondary school system in my
teaching in universities, and my comment overall is, frankly, I
am appalled at the level of grammar and writing skills that I
see in my classes. I emphasize a considerable amount of
writing, and I just cannot use the word anymore than it is
atrocious.
We need to place more emphasis on going back to the basics
of reading and writing and arithmetic. I hate to say that, but
the ability to communicate, orally and written, is extremely
important, and they have got to learn it at the beginning of
their educational process because it is extremely important as
you go all the way through the universities, through any types
of training programs, and ultimately in business, and if you
are going to be successful in business, you have got to be able
to talk and write.
Mr. King. Would there be anything about the multicultural
programs that we have in this country that you could identify
that encourages development of English language skills?
Ms. DeRocco. Encourages development of. Actually, I was
thinking, as my colleague was talking, that the emphasis in the
past perhaps on English as a second language rather than
English as a primary language is a problem that might have at
least aggravated the situation that you have identified. I am
not familiar with research on that topic. I would be glad to
look into it.
Mr. King. Mr. Lewis? Does multiculturalism encourage
English language skills or the development of those skills?
Mr. Lewis. Does it encourage it? From my experience in the
educational environment, frankly, from a multicultural
perspective, particularly for those students, and someone
mentioned earlier in terms of that we are seeing a lot more
students from other countries in our colleges and universities,
and I have certainly experienced that in my areas, but,
frankly, these students are some of the best, and, if anything,
they add to the quality of education and the educational
environment for what I will call our traditional U.S. students.
So both in terms of the desire to learn, the desire to put the
level of effort in to learning, yes, they may have, in terms of
actual English skills, there may be some lacking there, but
these people add tremendous value to that educational
environment.
Mr. King. And, Mr. Lewis, I agree with that statement. My
focus was more on the programs of multiculturalism themselves
rather than the reaction of the students, and my sense of it is
that as we roll out a multiculturalist agenda, we forget to
promote the essential communications skills that make these
people that come from all over the world successful in this
country, and so I appreciate your insight into that point, and
I thank the chairman.
Chairman Manzullo. Mr. King, thank you. I want to get on to
the second panel. We could pick up the sociological aspects
perhaps at a different time.
I want to thank you for coming, and then we will impanel
the second panel as soon as possible. Thank you.
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Pause.]
Mr. Bartlett. [Presiding] I believe our second panel is in
place. Thank you all very much for coming. Dr. Beth Buehlmann,
vice president and executive director of the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce; Brian McCarthy, chief operating officer, Computer
Technology Industry; Roger Joyce, vice president of
engineering, National Association of Manufacturers; Dr. Ernst
Volgenau, chairman and CEO, SRA International; Matthew Coffey,
president and chief operating officer, National Tooling and
Machining Association; Randolph Peers, vice president for
economic development, Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce; and Michael
Caslin, executive director and CEO, National Foundation for
Teaching Entrepreneurship.
You can proceed with your testimony in that order. All of
your written testimony, without objection, will be made a part
of the record. We would encourage you, if you can, to limit
your remarks to five minutes. Rest assured that there will be
more than ample time during the question period to amplify
issues of particular interest to either you or members of
Congress. Thank you very much for coming, and Dr. Buehlmann.
STATEMENT OF BETH B. BUEHLMANN, U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Ms. Buehlmann. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Congresswoman
Velazquez, and members of the Committee. I am the vice
president and executive director for the Center for Workforce
Preparation, a nonprofit affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, the world's largest business federation, representing
more than three million businesses and organizations.
CWP is on the forefront of helping businesses, especially
small- and medium-size businesses, in partnership with chambers
across the country, find, use, and build resources to develop a
skilled workforce and support productive workplaces. We are
addressing a key employer concern, and that is finding,
retaining, and advancing qualified workers. Over 90 percent of
the businesses that are members of chambers are small and
medium size, where the majority of job growth occurs and where
you have asked me to focus the emphasis of my statement.
My statement covers three points. First, in CWP surveys of
small- and medium-size businesses conducted over the past three
years, employers have reported difficulty in finding qualified
workers due to lack of skills. In these same surveys, employers
state that to remain competitive, they need qualified workers
who can perform the job today and adapt to the demands of
tomorrow, yet 30 percent of these employers are concerned that
the skills of their workforce are not going to keep pace.
Consider that, in 1950, 80 percent of jobs were classified
as unskilled and that now an estimated 85 percent of all jobs
are classified as skilled. Most jobs now require some post-
secondary education, but the growth in the number of workers
with education beyond high school will only be one-seventh of
what it grew between 1980 and 2000. Many of tomorrow's jobs do
not exist today, but we know that they are going to require
even greater skills and education.
Second, we know that a significant number of entry-level
workers are not equipped with the key skills they need to
succeed in an increasingly complex and technological work
environment. GAO and other researchers say that training and
retraining programs are most successful when they prepare
individuals for a specific, existing job. CWP, with state and
local chambers, fosters collaborations between post-secondary
institutions, employers, and the publicly funded workforce
system. Many small- and medium-size businesses, however, do not
have the human resources infrastructure to train their workers
in- house. They are very dependent on resources in their
communities.
Chambers can connect small- and medium-size businesses to
these resources and can aggregate the demand of local employers
to leverage those resources. They bridge the gap between
employers and workforce development providers and services,
connecting businesses with the best programs to meet their
needs. For small- and medium-size companies, this means that
chambers can make the connections with training programs and
services that these businesses find difficult to make on their
own, in other words, serving as a strong, employer-led,
workforce intermediary.
Third, as we look ahead, employers and workers are going to
place even greater reliance on levels of education to address
the ever-increasing skill demands of a competitive American
economy. Lifelong learning for working adults, K-12, and post-
secondary education all play a specific role in preparing the
present and next generation of workers for the challenges of
the 21st century labor market. Knowledge is being outdated at
rates that are escalating faster than ever before. For example,
a bachelor's degree in business now has a shelf life of just
about five years. Clearly, providing continuing education
opportunities for employees is no longer an option; it is a
necessity to staying competitive.
So what are some of the implications that can be drawn from
what I have said? With 73 percent of all post-secondary
education students being nontraditional students, in other
words, working adults who are seeking additional education and
training to return to the workforce, trying to remain current
in their field, looking to increase their potential earnings,
pursuing another job or even considering a career change in
today's demanding economy, the policies that we have in place
need to be examined in light of this growing need.
We can no longer focus only on traditional students as we
think about how employers and workers will learn, gain skills,
and remain competitive. And with only 60 percent of ninth
graders graduating, we need to strengthen our K-12 education
pipeline, reduce dropout rates, require a rigorous and relevant
high school curriculum, and align high school coursework with
what is demanded of our students to enter college and the
workforce. I tend to call this the ``I don't know/I don't care
phenomenon,'' and I mention that in my testimony. Many of our
graduates are prepared for neither college or the workforce.
CWP, in partnership with local chambers, other workforce-
development organizations, and our funders, has been
instrumental in defining and demonstrating the unique role of
local chambers in workforce development and education. My
written testimony mentions a few examples of our work with
partners such as the American Association of Community
Colleges, Job Corps, the National Association of Manufacturers,
and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.
In conclusion, any meaningful strategy to combat the
nation's workforce challenges must be met with a comprehensive
education and workforce development system. We are already
attempting to improve our K-12 system. We must expand our
services in the post-secondary education system to accommodate
adult working students. In today's and tomorrow's global
economy, lifetime learning has become mandatory and should be
accessible, flexible, and convenient to help maintain America's
competitive workforce.
I thank the Committee, and I look forward to your
questions.
[Ms. Buehlmann's statement may be found in the appendix.]
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. Mr. McCarthy?
STATEMENT OF BRIAN A. McCARTHY, COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION
Mr. McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, good
afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you today. I am Brian McCarthy, the chief operating officer of
the Computing Technology Industry Association, based in
Oakbrook, Illinois.
CompTIA represents more than 19,000 member companies in the
IT industry, the majority of which are small-to-medium-sized
enterprises. CompTIA is committed to fostering the growth of
the IT industry by promoting industry standards, and growing
professional IT expertise through training and certification,
and developing relevant business solutions. CompTIA believes
that we must promote public and private sector efforts to
provide Americans with the tools they need to compete and
succeed. Key among those tools is the acquisition of current
and evolving IT skills, skills that are increasingly demanded
in order to be successful in today's economy.
The changes wrought by IT on society are transforming the
fundamental nature of the workforce. As global competition
intensifies, the dependency on fluent and flexible IT skills
will only grow. Not surprisingly, much of the demand for these
skills will be for small businesses. According to the
Department of Labor, around 92 percent of all IT professional
workers are in non-IT companies, and 80 percent of those
professionals are working for small companies.
We recently surveyed some of CompTIA's small business
partners to assess the challenges they face in training their
workforce. We found that it is increasingly important for small
IT businesses to equip employees with essential technical
training in order to support their clients' complex business
systems. Small businesses are leaner and thus require highly
skilled employees to perform multispecialized IT functions
efficiently. Underlying this challenge is the cost of training.
As a result, small businesses are forced to evaluate
alternative means of training. To this end, CompTIA has
developed specialized initiatives and public/private
partnerships dedicated to IT training and certification across
industry sectors. I would like to highlight some of these
important training initiatives currently underway, the first of
which is the National IT Apprenticeship System, or NIAS,
jointly developed in partnership with the Department of Labor.
The program places new workers under the direction of
experienced IT professionals and provides a structured program
for measuring practical skills and achievements, identifying
weaknesses in skill gaps, and applying classroom and on-the-job
training to addressing those gaps. Research studies performed
by the Department of Labor and by CompTIA indicate that on-the-
job training is much more effective when combined with
classroom instruction than when delivered on its own.
Key to the success of this program is partnering with
community colleges, other educational institutions, and
ultimately employers. CompTIA is also currently administering
advanced technical skills training programs aimed at closing
the skills gap in our nation's IT workforce. Under these
programs, nearly 2,700 American technology workers in 12 states
will receive advanced IT job training in the coming months in
programs administered by CompTIA. Each of these states shares a
key characteristic in common: a projected long-term demand for
IT professionals in high-skill, high-level positions.
Policy initiatives and public/private partnerships such as
these can be designed to buttress the underlying training and
reskilling framework needed for U.S. IT-skilled workers today,
but getting Americans primed for emerging job opportunities
must be a central goal of U.S. policymakers as well as the
private sector. While many of these jobs will require a four-
year degree, an increasing number of these positions can be
filled by graduates of vocational schools and community
colleges, as well as through the apprenticeship programs. In
this regard, professional certification becomes an ongoing
validation across all of these programs. It provides
credibility, recognition of achievement, validation of
technical expertise, and quality assurance.
Tremendous possibilities abound for Congress to help
American IT workers to adapt to broader, IC-centric changes
moving through the global economy. For example, programs
provided through the Workforce Investment Act and the Perkins
Act are extremely valuable. Additionally, early education
programs which nurture a child's interest and achievement in
math and science are essential to filling future demands for
America's tech workers and should be fully funded. Promoting
capital investment in R&D are also key elements of a growth
agenda. Just last week, H.R. 4392, the Technology Retraining
and Investment Now Act, or TRAIN, was introduced, which
provided a tax credit for IT training. Policies such as these
will be especially helpful to small businesses, many of whom
are faced with substantial hurdles to remain competitive.
America must have a fluid and flexible work force. That is
the end goal here. When this can happen, workers can have the
tools to remain employed and employable, and companies have the
human resources to meet global consumer demand and creating
jobs here at home.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to than you for the opportunity
to testify today, and we at CompTIA, our members and staff,
stand ready to help Congress understand further the dynamics at
play in the U.S. and global economy, especially as they relate
to the maintenance and upgrade of IT skills in the U.S.
workforce. Thank you.
[Mr. McCarthy's statement may be found in the appendix.]
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you very much. Mr. Joyce?
STATEMENT OF ROGER JOYCE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. I am Roger Joyce.
I am vice president of engineering at the Bilco Company, a
small family business started in 1926 by my grandfather, George
W. Lyons, Sr.
We are manufacturers of architectural-access products, with
200 employees in facilities in West Haven, Connecticut; Truman,
Arkansas; and Santa Teresa, New Mexico. We are a member of the
National Association of Manufacturers, the nation's oldest and
largest industrial trade association, representing 14,000
member companies and 350 member associations serving
manufacturers and employees in every industrial sector in all
50 states. Approximately 10,000 of NAM's members are small- and
medium-sized manufacturers, of which we are one. I am also vice
chair of CBIA, the Connecticut Business and Industry
Association, one of NAM's statewide affiliate members.
I thank you for this opportunity to discuss the importance
of a strong manufacturing workforce to our country and the
workforce challenges that today threaten our competitive
leadership in manufacturing.
A year ago, manufacturers were struggling through one of
the toughest business climates in recent memory. In order to
stay competitive, they tightened their belts on things like
capital equipment spending, expansion plans, and hiring and
training employees. Interestingly, this may sound somewhat
counterintuitive. Oftentimes, the slow periods are the best
times to up-skill workers. When facilities do not have to
operate 24/7, it is much easier and more cost effective to take
people off the line for training. And yet there are still skill
shortages in manufacturing, the recent downsizing of two
million manufacturing jobs notwithstanding.
Skill shortages remain, and here is why. First, consider
the unavoidable demographics of the labor force. The boomer
generation, in every field, from teachers to machinists, are
starting to retire. According to one major corporate vice
president, the average age of their firm's highly skilled,
highly paid machinists is 58 years' old, and there is no
pipeline of replacements.
Second, the march of advanced technology is infusing old
industrial sectors, like mine, while creating new ones, raising
skills requirements throughout the economy and creating serious
skill gaps in the labor force.
Third, firms already struggling with these two challenges
confront a continuously globalizing economy where competition
is intensifying on capabilities as well as cost.
Fourth, young people today do not see manufacturing as a
viable career opportunity. Changing the perception of
manufacturing will require aggressive marketing of
manufacturing opportunities to potential new entrants to the
workforce who must have the requisite math, science, and
literacy skills needed in today's manufacturing environment.
The recent upturn in the economy changes none of this. In
fact, as conditions improve, more job opportunities requiring
higher skill levels will be created.
All four of these conditions center on the skills of the
labor force, which needs systematic upgrading and expansion.
This argues for a new policy approach to workforce development,
especially during a recession when hundreds of thousands are
idled, many of whose basic education and skills are inadequate
or at risk in modern manufacturing.
One approach is to turn downtime into training time,
something some of our European colleagues have done for
decades. In our business, we use this time to train our
employees in the principles of lean manufacturing. As a result,
even though business activity will rise and fall, we become a
stronger competitor.
Until now, human resource policymakers have seen recessions
as storms to be weathered. The labor force policy response was
mainly income and benefit maintenance and maybe some relocation
assistance. That has been the status quo, and we cannot afford
to maintain the status quo. This is not about just fixing the
unemployment system. The issues at stake will lead to a
declining economy if we constrict ourselves with antiquated
systems. We need to ratchet up our skills base now.
We need to make the public workforce system more employer
friendly. Supporting the 1998 Workforce Investment Act will
help us more effectively match labor market demands with labor
market supply. The current administration has made great
strides in creating a ``dual-customer'' system, but we need to
sharpen the focus because too few employers know the system
even exists, or when they do, it falls short of meeting their
needs for skilled and job-ready workers. As effective as the
Workforce Investment Act has been, we are disappointed that
funding has been reduced 10 percent and urge review of this
critical area.
One strategy NAM and the U.S. Chamber have successfully
employed, in partnership with foundations and the U.S.
Department of Labor, has been to work through their employer-
intermediary organizations. In particular, business and trade
associations are highly effective organizations for small
business, allowing our voices to be heard and providing
opportunities for us to participate in the employment and
training system that often are only available to large
corporations.
One example of this is the three-year, $2.2 million, U.S.
DOL demonstration grant for incumbent and dislocated workers,
which CBIA received in 2002 to assist manufacturers with job
training. Despite the recession and loss of manufacturing jobs
in Connecticut, CBIA, working with both community colleges and
private contractors, was able to provide training assistance to
23 companies, train over a thousand employees who took 126
courses in 60 different training areas. Courses in lean
manufacturing, Six Sigma, supervisory training, teamwork,
blueprint reading, CNC machining, and laser and fuel cell
technology, as well as English as a second language, were made
available to employees through this federal grant program.
Participants in this program were better prepared for their
current jobs and able to move more effectively into higher
level positions.
Unfortunately, it is my understanding that this
demonstration grant program has been eliminated. As a result,
after June 30, when this grant is completed, CBIA will no
longer be able to assist manufacturers in a way that works so
effectively for us. We feel that such programs should be
restored and, indeed, expanded.
We need to support our community college system. The
president has made it clear that he does. Community colleges
are the backbone of the worker education and training system,
and we need to increase our investment in our communities by
supporting their growth and connection to their local
employers. Gateway Community College serves the greater New
Haven business community by developing programs that address
our specific requirements, even employer by employer, if
necessary.
We also need to ensure that our citizens have the financial
aid they need to get access to post-secondary education that
will give them good jobs and family-supporting wages. We need
action on the Higher Education Act to ensure that access to
funds is streamlined and available when needed, and we
certainly need to strengthen the ties between higher education
and the workforce needs of business.
The Bilco Company is a small manufacturer, but we compete
in the world marketplace. Ten years ago, we sold our products
in five countries. Today, we sell in 65 countries. Our
workforce must be at least as skilled as our competitors' in
other countries, but we are losing this battle. The Department
of Labor estimates that the skill shortage I have described
will affect 10 million workers by the year 2010.
A new program in Connecticut is starting to make a
difference. We actively support the Connecticut State Scholars
pilot program in New Haven. This program connects the school
district with business to encourage eighth graders to choose a
more rigorous curriculum in high school. Upon completion of
this program, they are in a much better position to enter the
workforce, the military, or pursue higher education
opportunities. This means they are better able to compete with
their peers around the world.
I encourage the Committee to support the initiatives I have
presented so that manufacturers like myself are in a position
to compete, to grow, and to create new jobs. I thank you.
[Mr. Joyce's statement may be found in the appendix.]
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. Mr. Joyce, does your company make
the outside-access door for basements?
Mr. Joyce. Yes, we do. That is the world-famous, Bilco
basement door.
Mr. Bartlett. It is, indeed. I would just like to note that
when I was growing up that more people referred to the
refrigerator as the ``Frigidaire'' because the Frigidaire had
so dominated that market, and when you were going to buy an
outside, basement-access door, you were going to buy a Bilco
door, no matter who made it, because you have so dominated the
market in quality and recognition.
Mr. Joyce. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My grandfather
invented that product in the backyard shop, and it really was
the genesis of our company, and it is a model of ingenuity, of
entrepreneurship, that we still follow today. Thank you.
Mr. Bartlett. And you are selling it in 65 countries today.
Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Volgenau?
STATEMENT OF ERNST VOLGENAU, SRA INTERNATIONAL
Mr. Volgenau. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, my
name is Ernst Volgenau. I am chairman and CEO of SRA
International, and I am representing the Information Technology
Association of America, where I am chairman of the Workforce
Education Committee.
The Information Technology Association of America is a
leading trade association for the information technology
industry. ITAA has 380 members, and SRA International is one of
them. ITAA member companies represent a broad spectrum of
industry sectors: computer software and services, e-commerce,
enterprise systems, broadband communications, and other areas.
ITAA represents companies of all sizes, from large,
multibillion-dollar enterprises to small, entrepreneurial
firms.
I appreciate the Committee's interest in small business. I
know what it is like to be part of a small company. I started
SRA International in the basement of my home in 1978. Today,
SRA International is an information technology consulting and
system-integration company having revenue of about $600 million
and about 3,300 employees. We have been on the Fortune magazine
list of best places to work in America for five years in a row.
Last year, SRA devoted about 65 percent of its subcontracting
dollars to small businesses, and we try to treat each with
fairness and respect.
We very much appreciate this Committee's support for worker
training, which is essential to the economic health and
vitality of our country. The increasing emphasis on information
technology has produced fundamental changes in the skills and
work performed by the average American. As the U.S. shifted
from a domestic, industrial economy to a global information
economy, our workforce has changed, too. Many workers are
concerned about how global sourcing, sometimes referred to as
``offshore outsourcing,'' will affect their jobs. A recent
study by ITAA and Global Insight shows that offshore
outsourcing causes the entire U.S. economy to perform at a
higher level and actually produces a net gain in jobs and wages
over time.
Regardless of global sourcing, the American IT industry is
still the world's leader, and that is not going to change
anytime soon. However, the global marketplace for IT is
becoming more competitive. Americans must recognize this and
adapt to a changing economic environment through education,
training, and retraining.
Small businesses play a key role in ensuring our high-
technology strength. They provide technology innovation,
entrepreneurial vitality, and entry points for many seeking IT
jobs. Small businesses generally hire workers from local
communities and so have a major stake in ensuring that these
individuals are adequately educated and trained. Education and
training of American workers are essential in this increasingly
competitive world. U.S. high-tech leadership is significantly
aided by the nation's robust education and training
infrastructure, institutions of higher learning, community
colleges, private technical colleges, e-learning certification
programs. All of these make contributions.
In view of this, ITAA has four basic recommendations or
observations. First, industry and the federal government should
strengthen partnerships and better identify local training
needs. For example, local workforce investment boards are
building partnerships involving employers, community colleges,
and other community organizations. Community technology centers
in economically disadvantaged communities give people hands-on
access to technology. These centers should be considered for
use as a possible model to disseminate entry-level training.
Second, companies must be aware of training resources
available through various workforce-development programs.
Businesses, particularly small businesses, should participate
more actively through state and local workforce boards and
government one-stop centers so that the communication loop is
closed between those who provide training and those who need
appropriately trained employees.
Third, the American Society for Training and Development,
ASTD, is a leading association of workplace learning
professionals. ASTD notes, in their state-of-the industry
report, that the technology sector spends more on IT training
than any other sector surveyed. IT companies have developed
innovative approaches to the use of e-learning and delivering
workforce training.
Fourth, the government should revise its education and
training policy to help build the competitive advantage of
small businesses. Now, ITAA has a number of recommendations
here ranging from the H1-B training fund to No Child Left
Behind, but in the interest of time, I am going to just refer
you to the written testimony and say, in conclusion, that
America's future clearly depends on the availability of an
educated and trained IT workforce. Government, industry,
academia, and individual workers share a common purpose and
must work together to produce a high-tech workforce that meets
the demands of the new century. Thank you.
[Mr. Volgenau's statement may be found in the appendix.]
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. Mr. Coffey?
STATEMENT OF MATTHEW B. COFFEY, NATIONAL TOOLING AND MACHINING
ASSOCIATION
Mr. Coffey. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. Ladies and
gentlemen, as the eighth witness on this single subject, my
challenge is not a problem of knowing what to say; it is how to
make it interesting to you. You have my written statement, and
what I would like to do really, then, is just reflect on some
of the fundamentals, as I see them.
As you know, I represent the tool, die, precision
machining, special machine-building industry in the United
States, a trade association that has been around for 61 years,
focused on education and training as its principal purpose. We
have been dealing with the federal system of training and
education for that entire period of time, and there is a
certain point at which you say, when you look across the
spectrum of federal programs and see 175 or 178 programs in
this area, never has so much money and effort gone into produce
so little result because we do not really see a major
improvement in the quality of the applicants showing up at the
door of the company.
Human resources, of course, in any manufacturing company
represent the competitive advantage, and in the present
manufacturing environment, of course, the biggest single thing
that you need to have is pricing power, and that is only
available to you in this kind of a market where you have
innovation, and innovation only comes from highly educated
people thinking about the solution of customers' problems.
We, at the same time, are experiencing a tremendous demand
for continuing education, for continual learning on the part of
the incumbent workforce while most federal programs are focused
on entry level or focused on creating new entrants into the
industry as opposed to upgrading the skills of those presently
in the industry.
Now, small, high-tech companies carry a heavy training
expense burden. There is no question about it, and they have
been doing it for years. Their competitors around the world do
not have that same burden. They wind up having educational
systems that make skills training mandatory from kindergarten
through college and do not give students the option of one
track or the other. I think, fundamentally, in education
policy, we made a mistake when we divided those two, and in
dividing them, we created a problem which we are living with at
this point in time.
The federal government, until 1993, when it got into the
block grant programs, supported industry-specific training, but
once it went into block grant programs, sent the money to the
states under formulas, the states wound up using that training
money to attract foreign investment instead of training
incumbent workforce or training people at the entry level.
So we have got a system that has not worked too well and
that is designed for academic achievement, not mechanical
skill, and as a result, as you heard earlier, more than 50
percent of applicants show up deficient in one way or the
other, not knowing math, not knowing science, not knowing some
of the skills that we need in our particular manufacturing
industry. And the one truth that I think most people will come
to is that technology is only as good as the user. You can have
a very sophisticated computer sitting in front of you or a very
sophisticated machine tool. If you do not know how to use it,
then, you have wasted your money on the technology. So software
and hardware technology are changing all the time, and workers
need to be changing with them, need to be learning, need to be
upgrading their skills.
I really think it is time to change the federal approach,
and I think we are working very hard as an organization to try
to do that. I think we do need to think about once again having
national training programs that are industry specific, picking
those industries where we see the opportunity for continuing
innovation and development and having specific national
programs that lead in that direction.
We have been talking for years about tax credits for small-
and medium-sized businesses to ensure that they will invest in
training. We have been unable to get very much support for that
at any level of government here at all, but it is a real
necessity.
Third, I think we need to support changing the training
infrastructure. We need to use the technology available to us
to deliver material to people where they are, when they need
it, what they need. That says that we need to use distance
learning, we need to use it effectively, and we need to break
away from the patterns of the old system, the old structure.
And, finally, I think we need to have better federal
program coordination. We have all of these programs. We have no
one coordinating the efforts and the activities, and whether
you are talking about the DOL or the DOC or the DOE or the TAA
program or the MEP program or any of the programs that were
talked about earlier, they are all little, narrow smokestacks
that do not work together, that do not effectively deliver a
product to the manufacturing company, and that is the great
frustration.
So I think we have a lot of work cut out for us. I
appreciate the interest of the Committee in this subject. It is
a subject I have been working on for 25 years of my career and
one in which I would hope that we can start a process that does
start to solve some of the problems that we face in
manufacturing. Thank you.
[Mr. Coffey's statement may be found in the appendix.]
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you very much. Mr. Peers?
STATEMENT OF RANDOLPH PEERS, BROOKLYN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Mr. Peers. Good afternoon. My name is Randolph Peers, and I
am the vice president for economic development at the Brooklyn
Chamber of Commerce, and that is Brooklyn, New York. I want to
thank the chairman, Congresswoman Velazquez, and the rest of
the Committee for having me here testifying today.
Just a little background on Brooklyn. Brooklyn is the most
populous of New York City's five boroughs, with a population of
two and a half million people and over 36,000 businesses. The
majority of these businesses, some 67 percent, employ between
one and four workers, making Brooklyn home to a true small
business economy.
In my testimony today, I would like to share with you the
small business perspective as it relates to issues of
education, training, and workforce development based on the
Brooklyn chamber's seven years of direct involvement in
providing workforce services to its membership.
In May of 2004, the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce released
the results of a comprehensive, labor market review it
conducted with support from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's
Center for Workforce Preparation. While I will not bore you
with industry specifics about Brooklyn, I do want to touch upon
the statistics with respect to recruitment and training by
small businesses.
Forty-two percent of Brooklyn businesses indicated a
willingness to hire additional workers this year, up from 20
percent that actually did hire last year. That is a good thing.
Of those businesses that did hire additional workers in 2003,
32 percent indicated that they had a significant problem
recruiting skilled or professional employees. Of those
organizations planning to hire, small businesses struggled the
most with recruiting skilled and professional labor, including
supervisory employees.
While 82 percent of businesses overall indicated that they
provide some sort of worker training, the majority, 66 percent,
identified the training as informal and on the job. The number
of small businesses indicating that they provide informal, on-
the-job training jumped to 82 percent.
Brooklyn businesses were evenly split over the importance
of a college degree, with 49 percent indicating that a degree
was important or very important. Small businesses seemed to
value the degree least, with only 38 percent indicating a
degree was important.
And, finally, only a small minority of businesses of all
classifications turned to the publicly funded workforce-
development system for either recruitment or training
assistance. Predictably, small businesses were least likely to
utilize the system.
The statistics contained in this labor market review give
us a snapshot of a predominantly small business economy in
transition. On the positive side, there were signs of emerging
new sectors in the economy in finance, insurance, real estate,
construction, and tourism. These jobs will require higher
skills while offering more career-ladder opportunities for
residents.
By contrast, however, many of the existing businesses are
experiencing several obstacles to recruitment and training,
especially amongst the skilled professions. Additionally, a
majority of these same businesses are small- and mid-sized
companies, representing a myriad of obstacles that prevent them
from taking advantage of the public workforce system and its
resources.
In many cases, an absence of a formal human resources
department or a basic lack of capacity to deal with workforce
issues represents the most significant challenge. Small
businesses tend to focus more on immediate, bottom-line issues,
not recognizing the impact of staffing, training, or employee-
retention issues and the effects that they can have over the
long haul. In other cases, it was simply a lack of awareness
that prevents businesses from taking advantage of the public
workforce-development system.
Lastly, many small businesses have ambivalence towards
working with what they perceive as a government-run program
that appears too bureaucratic or too social services oriented.
Since 1998, the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce has operated a
successful staffing service for small business. This program,
called Good Help, has been at the forefront of providing
various workforce-development services to the small business
community by acting as an intermediary between such companies
and the public workforce system and acting as a partner in the
public workforce system. For small businesses, the advantage in
such a service can be many. For many businesses that lack a
human resource capacity, the chamber can provide the expertise
to fill the void.
In addition, these businesses are already working with the
chamber of commerce in other ways, and the comfort of working
with an established relationship increases the likelihood that
the smaller employer will see the benefit in such programs and,
over time, will access other publicly funded, workforce-
development services.
But while it is clear that business intermediaries can play
an effective role in any workforce system, we must also
acknowledge the need to create better synergy between economic
development and workforce development. It is my belief that
without greater integration, the success of any workforce-
development initiative, including training initiatives, will be
limited.
To a certain degree, through industry-specific training
initiatives, many cities are beginning to create this
coordination, but we must be mindful that such large-scale
training initiatives tend to benefit larger businesses that
bring many jobs to the table. It is also important to recognize
that small businesses, even in similar industries, have
differing needs as opposed to larger companies when it comes to
worker training.
Whereas larger companies may be looking for higher-tech
training as a means to increase worker proficiency in a
particular field or on a particular piece of machinery, small
companies tend to have more elementary training needs. Adult
basic education, English language skills, critical thinking
abilities, and soft skills proficiency are more likely to be
cited by a small business as a training need.
We also would like to point out that small businesses are
more likely to hire lesser-skilled workers because they cannot
compete with larger businesses with respect to wages and
benefits. Therefore, the need for incumbent worker training
that leads to career-ladder opportunities geared towards basic
skills is critical for the long-term success of both the
employer and the employee.
Also, smaller businesses in well-established industries
need a more generic basket of services that includes basic
business assistance not directly related to workforce
development. Such services include help with financing issues,
basic business planning, access to information on nonworkforce-
related incentive programs, marketing and promotion assistance,
access to procurement opportunities, guidance on technology
issues, and basic technical assistance related to compliance
matters. It is through this type of basic development support
that smaller companies become mid-sized companies and
ultimately employ more workers. In these cases, the road to
increased WIA outcomes is long and winding.
On a system-wide level, more cities and states are
examining ways to create better synergy between workforce
development and economic development. In New York City, for
example, last year, the Department of Employment was merged
into the Department of Small Business Services. In Idaho,
Governor Dirk Kempthorne recently announced the state's
intention to merge its labor department and its department of
commerce.
In conclusion, government should play a powerful role in
helping to foster greater integration between economic and
workforce development beyond what is promoted through existing
WIA legislation. Such integration will, in the long run, help
not only large businesses, but will also empower smaller
businesses to grow and become more competitive. In this
process, small businesses will take advantage of workforce
development and training services. Increased awareness and
participation by small businesses in the workforce-development
system will help to make the system more responsive to business
needs and more in step with industry trends.
Some suggestions for promoting a business-driven system
that is more responsive to small businesses include: number
one, encouraging policies that foster greater collaboration
between business, education, workforce training providers, and
the public workforce-development system; two, encourage
policies that integrate workforce and economic development;
three, create ways to promote and encourage the inclusion of
intermediaries like chambers of commerce and trade associations
in the marketing and delivery of workforce services as partners
in the system; four, through WIA, mandate specific business
services outcomes, not just job-seeker outcomes, in an effort
to make the system more accountable; number five, expand
opportunities and lift restrictions on incumbent worker
training programs to allow for a wider range of training
options; number six, allow WIA funds to be used for limited
economic-development activities, create new tax incentives and
wage-subsidy programs that promote new job creation as well as
job retention during economic recessions; and, finally, support
efforts to increase local labor market information designed to
predict industry and business trends. Thank you.
[Mr. Peers' statement may be found in the appendix.]
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you very much. Mr. Caslin?
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. CASLIN, NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR
TEACHING ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Mr. Caslin. Thank you. The title of my presentation is
``Where Will Our Next Generation of Entrepreneurs, Our Next
Generation of National Wealth Creators and Manufacturers Come
From: A Call to Action for the Development of an
Entrepreneurial Culture for All Americans.''
I have been CEO of NFTE, the National Foundation for
Teaching Entrepreneurship, for 16 years. NFTE is a New York
City-based, globally focused, entrepreneurship education
foundation. The testimony I have submitted is 34 pages, which
reflects our thinking over the past 16 years of working in the
most impoverished communities in the world, with
multigeneration, unemployed families, and how to improve their
plight.
I am touched by Chairman Manzullo's approach to getting to
know the people who testify here today. I wanted to share with
you my background. I am a grandson of a Gaelic-speaking,
immigrant farmer who escaped poverty from Ireland, who came to
the United States, and the one job he could get was as a mucker
for the New York City police force stables. He died digging by
hand the 34th Street tunnel of New York City.
My grandmother and mother survived on widow's assistance
and welfare and family support, and my mother worked throughout
high school to support her mom and herself, and even at the
young age of 75 years today, works every day.
I am a son of a proud union steamfitter and photo engraver.
I am a first-generation entrepreneur, a first-generation
college graduate, with two sons currently enrolled in college,
each of whom have their own business, and a teen daughter who
is college bound, and she also has her own business. Growing
up, when I went to school, it was be good, do good in school,
and someone will give you a job. No one said you could create
your own job. While I worked 17 jobs from the time I was nine,
I did not know I was a micro-entrepreneur. I knew I had to work
to earn money.
My children and NFTE children know the difference between a
job and creating a job and being an entrepreneur. For the last
16 years, NFTE has championed entrepreneurship education for
America's low-income teens and young adults, especially for
African-American and Latino youth. We have seen firsthand in
programs in Brooklyn, New York City, Baltimore, Chicago,
Arizona, New Mexico, First Nations, Toledo, Ohio, tremendous
entrepreneurial potential. The issue is not only to attract
bright and young people to this economy that is changing but
also to unleash the talent of many young people who are turned
off to life right now.
If you go into many schools across the country, and you
mention IT opportunity, you will have blank stares. Very few of
them are aware of what ``IT'' means, and very few of them are
enabled to pursue opportunity in the IT field in any way,
shape, or form. We have found that over 60 to 70 percent of our
students have never been inside a bank, so their knowledge of
financial literacy and formal banking processes is very
limited. Eighty percent of our students who form their own
businesses are first-generation entrepreneurs, and I ask the
Committee to consider that the motivation, why are we engaged,
why we should learn this, is something that must be looked at
in addition to the skills that are needed.
We have seen all across the world the demand for the NFTE
program, and that demand is really in the form of American
business English and American entrepreneurship as a second
language. There is a tremendous motivation to understand the
code and the culture of entrepreneurship.
As a lecturer at Harvard Business School and Stanford
Graduate School of Business, Dartmouth--School, Duke, and an
adjunct professor at Manhattanville College and also Babson on
entrepreneurship and philanthropy, I can tell you firsthand
that the code of wealth creation is not getting out. The
understanding of how to participate in this economy is not
getting out.
We have seen, over time, young people, ages 11 to 18,
become more economically productive members by learning the
entrepreneurial process. Our strategy is to partner with
schools, universities, and unleash experiential curricula,
train and support youth workers.
N.F.T.E. started as a `dropout`-prevention program, and we
are now positioned as a turn-on program in school districts
across the country, as well as in partnership with a number of
community-based organizations, and it is our opinion that
ownership and ownership attitude and ownership perspective is
also one of the most ultimate technologies that could be
promoted.
The state of being literate in entrepreneurship really
brings with it a joy and a value and a creativity and
understanding of the wealth-creation process. Young people can
begin to see how they fit in the macro and micro-economic
production structure, the value chain, where they can
contribute, and how they can help the nation. We can and must
promote this awareness for all Americans, especially our youth,
especially those living in poverty today.
I am honored to represent NFTE today because this is the
month where we will have graduated our one-hundred-thousandth
young entrepreneur. It is a very special time for us. We
started, again, in a single site in Fort Apache in the south
Bronx as a dropout-prevention program.
How did we do it? We did it with the private sector help.
We have had a coalition of over 500 private sector sponsors,
including Goldman Sachs and Microsoft. Microsoft helped NFTE
create the first entrepreneurship learning system in the world
on the Internet for teens and young adults. The Shelby Davis
Foundation, NASDAQ, the Sandberg Foundation, Weinberg and
Atlantic Philanthropies. Atlantic Philanthropies' Charles
Feehey, the founder of Duty Free Shops, has taken an idea,
created $3 billion in value, and is now giving it back to help
disadvantaged youth in Ireland, the U.S., and South Africa.
In addition, the U.S. SBA, the U.S. Department of
Education, and cabinet-level members--Secretary Evans,
Secretary Paige, and Secretary Chao--have all been to see NFTE
in action.
One of our leverages is to use university partners. We
partner with Babson College, Carnegie Mellon, Georgetown,
Northwestern, Stanford, Yale, and Columbia. We do that in order
to get their code of wealth creation. We have identified, in
working with them, 1,400 key concepts, behaviors, and practices
of entrepreneurship that most adults and most young people are
never exposed to.
Our mission as a charity is to bring that code of the
businesshood, the code of wealth creation, out so that young
people can get turned on. We are experiencing this not only in
the United States, where we have teachers now certified in 46
states, but we are also active in the U.K., Holland, Belgium,
Germany, and Ireland, India, Argentina, countries in Africa,
Latin America, and China. It seems that globally
entrepreneurship is one of the fastest-growing languages in
demand.
Our long-term objective is to enable each low-income
American worker and first-generation business owner to be
sparked with the powerful knowledge of entrepreneurship and to
help ignite what Policy Analyst Mike Novak refers to as ``the
fire of invention,'' get people turned on.
We have hope here at NFTE. We see dropouts every day. We
know that they are heading for a state of despair, not to a
career. Why are they giving up the American dream? We spend
many, many hours with them trying to understand that.
Oftentimes, it is because no one is showing them how to dream
it and how to achieve it, and many do not believe it exists.
Even within miles of this hearing room, we have programs in
Anacostia High School where many young people just do not
believe the American dream exists for them.
What can we do? Well, we have to work together through more
effective public policy, more innovative education curriculum,
higher demands of our citizens. We have hope because we have
conducted seven major research evaluations on the impact of
teaching entrepreneurship to young people. We work with
Harvard, Brandeis, Columbia, and Babson College Center for
Entrepreneurship. We have been able to show that occupational
aspirations have increased because of viewing the world as an
entrepreneur. We have been able to show that independent
reading, self-motivated reading, occurs once a student gets
turned on to the possibilities of entrepreneurship. We have
also been able to show that Latino youth become more engaged
and stay more engaged in school as they learn how to not only
earn money for their families as well as see the value of
school and why they are there.
We had a comment from Dr. Andrew Hahn of Brandeis
University: ``NFTE succeeds in teaching the skills and
knowledge that are important to helping prepare young Americans
for careers in business ownership.'' We have been able to prove
the entrepreneurship knowledge increases by 20 times. Actual
business activity rates increase by 30 times the amount, and in
our conversations today, we are able to make sure that our
young people understand that there are four types of business
in the economy today: wholesale, retail, service, and
manufacturing. Being able to understand just that one element
and how you can fit and how you can flow between those four
areas is mission critical.
While we have grown from a single school in the south Bronx
near Yankee Stadium to truly a global movement, we also know
that to be competitive in our world economy in the future, we
must create it today over the next decade. Manufacturing is a
key part, and young people can pursue careers as entrepreneurs
in all types of businesses.
It is our founding premise as a nation that the essence of
a democratic capitalistic society lies squarely on the
shoulders of each generation of productive, responsible, and
business-competent Americans. We can never take this for
granted. We can work together. We can create a greater strength
and a greater competitive position for our country, and we will
see it in the face of our children. Greatness can exist again
in many cities where it is fading. We look forward to working
with the members of Congress here to assure that, and we are
ready to stand with you. Thank you very much.
[Mr. Caslin's statement may be found in the appendix.]
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you and thank you all very much for
your testimony. Ms. Velazquez?
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you for your testimony. This has
really been quite helpful to us, and we know that we need to do
better in terms of putting a comprehensive approach in the area
of training, retraining, and helping small businesses.
Mr. Coffey, you mentioned that there are so many training
programs throughout the federal government, and we all know
that they exist in the books, but one thing is the number of
140; the other thing is that some, more than one third, have
either been flat funded or their funds have been cut. We have
an example here of a pilot grant program in Connecticut that
has been working beautifully, and yet at the end of your grant,
that program is going to be zeroed out.
So what we need to do is really if we want to continue to
be competitive and create the meaningful jobs that we need, we
have to identify those programs that really can help provide
the tools and the training that will enable small businesses to
be able not only to hire but to keep those workers.
Another area is how can we help small businesses in the
area of training and retaining those workers? We work together
FREA, and I worked with Chairman Talent, who passed that
legislation that will provide tax credits to small businesses
for workers' retraining and training, and yet nothing happened.
Has there been any discussion in terms of that legislation?
Mr. Coffey. The latest discussions I have had have been
with Senator Collins on the Senate side, who did attempt to put
a tax credit type of provision into the Foreign Sales
Corporation extraterritorial income bill, and she has now been
joined by Senator Reed from Rhode Island as well in trying to
put a bill together that would possibly be introduced in this
session. Obviously, we have not introduced anything on this
side, and we have gotten no response out of the administration
to this idea.
The nice thing about it is that what you are asking for is
an incentive to get employers to engage in the expenditure
necessary to train people. You are not asking for the federal
government to pay for the whole thing; you are asking for them
to give them a tax credit that is probably a tenth to a third
of the cost of what they would actually expend in the training.
I look forward, if we can start to build some momentum, to work
with you again to try to get this legislation moving.
Ms. Velazquez. The other thing is the Trade Adjustment
Assistance program and the Manufacturing Extension program,
both of which you mentioned in your testimony, that really are
an example of programs that can get training and education to
places where we need it the most, and they have proven to be
effective, yet on this budget, Fiscal Year 2005, they are
slated to be cut.
So it seems to me that there is a disconnect between what
is going on in this country in terms of our economy and small
businesses as job creators and the tools that we need to
provide, and there is a role for the federal government to play
in helping small businesses.
I would like to ask Mr. Peers and Mr. Caslin and Mr. Joyce,
I know that in your program you provide English as a second
language. In your experience, Mr. Caslin, do you feel that
Latino youth, they are not willing, or they resist integrating,
learning English as a second language?
Mr. Caslin. No. I think that they want to see a way to pace
themselves in to get connected, some type of process. We see
the motivation there, and there is also an engagement strategy
that once the students start to understand some of the
concepts, the motivation to possibly read more increases
without question.
Ms. Velazquez. We just called New York City, the department
of education, and we asked for the number of applicants that
are on a waiting list, and they are telling us 90 percent of
all applicants are on a waiting list in New York. So the
problem is not that people do not want to learn the language;
the problem is the services and resources that are available.
Mr. Peers, you mentioned a variety of specific initiatives
throughout the country in places as diverse as Idaho, Florida,
and New York. What is the advantage of those local initiatives?
By what means are they encouraged, and how are the lessons
learned shared throughout the workforce-development community?
Mr. Peers. I think that the biggest advantage is
communication. Quite often, economic-development initiatives
are going on over here, workforce initiatives are going on
here, and as many of my colleagues here on the panel have
already said, you know, we need to refocus our training efforts
and make sure that they correspond to industry trends and to
jobs of the future. That cannot happen if the two worlds are
not talking and coming together.
So first off, it is communication, and then, secondly, I
think, once that communication occurs, they start to realize
that there are very similar goals, that you cannot have
effective economic development without a good workforce, and
you cannot have a good workforce without having the jobs
available to meet those worker needs and to grow your economy.
And then you start to see more and more the leveraging of
resources in creative ways, in ways that allow a maximization
of efforts on both fronts. So those are the two key benefits of
bringing those two together.
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. I was born in 1926, and so,
through my life, I have seen a lot of technology changes. We
still plowed the fields with horses when I was a little boy.
Some feel that some of these technology improvements have
had a dark side as well as a bright side. One of those is air
conditioning. Many people would argue that our country really
started downhill when they air conditioned Washington so that
Congress could stay here through the summer. I think it was
Will Rogers who noted that anytime the legislature is in
session, the Republic is at risk, and I think that we had a
kinder, gentler, less-intrusive government before we had air
conditioning, and we could stay here, focused on mischief
through all of the hot summer.
A second technology improvement which I think, arguably,
has had some very negative effects is television. I note that
the more people watch television, the lower our SAT scores were
in our schools. So through all of those years when television
was becoming more and more important in the home, why, the SAT
scores were dropping lower and lower in our schools.
Our higher education institutions are a marvel of the world
and the envy of the world, and to know that all you have to do
is to go there to see who the students are, and most of them
are not students from this country because students from all
over the world come there.
A little bit ago, there was a survey done of the graduates
of our secondary schools in 21 countries, and we were thankful
for Cypress and Sri Lanka because of the 21 countries they were
the only two whose young people scored lower than our young
people scored.
All of you have been talking about education and training,
and Mr. Lewis from the previous panel noted that if he was
going to choose one word to denote the quality of the young
people who came out of our K-through-12 system, it was
atrocious in terms of their preparation in education. Clearly,
how could we have, far and away, the best education system in
the world in our graduate schools and one that is not far from
the basement? Of all of the industrialized, civilized world, I
think we rank at the bottom. How did we get there? Why are we
doing such a tremendous job in our graduate schools and such a
lousy job in our K-through-12? To what do you attribute that?
Let us just go through the panel and tell me what you think.
How did we get there, and what do we need to do to get out of
the basement?
Ms. Buehlmann. I think one of the distinctions that you
have to make is you have a universal K-12 system, and if you
are going to make it relevant to students, it is getting back
to understanding why they are there, the context for their
learning, what relevance it has to what they are going to do
next, and seeing a path for them to be able to get there.
I think this is also true for our teachers. I think we have
to create a system where people understand that the skills that
are needed to go into the workplace or into higher education
are very similar and that we should get away from the notion of
a lockstep education system and instead create significant on
ramps and off ramps so that individuals can participate in
education, understand the relevance of it, apply it, and be
able to use it to advance themselves, both in post-secondary
education and in the workplace. We also need to do the same in
terms of our college students when many of them are graduating
from college and going back to community colleges in order to
get skills that are relevant to the workplace. We have to
better understand that the skills of the workplace, in fact,
are many times more difficult and more complex than our going
to our institutions of post-secondary education.
And, finally, I would suggest that we encourage people to
learn throughout their lives, understand that they can get
certificates and advance through those certificates, accumulate
those certificates towards degrees, if they choose to, but that
it is not necessarily a lockstep situation, and that parents
need to understand that going into the workplace and being able
to go back into education has as much relevance as continuing
on and getting through it in one fell swoop.
So I would say it is relevance, and it is connection to the
path that we are pursuing.
Mr. Bartlett. I think most of our people understand the
need for lifetime education because the technology is changing
so rapidly. But we have graduated, I think, more than a million
people from our high schools who, quite literally, could not
read their diploma. Shame on a society that permits that to
happen. I think you were addressing that in your lockstep, that
you cannot just------.
Ms. Buehlmann. I think we also give up. There are many
people who believe that if a child cannot read by the fourth
grade, they are never going to be able to read, and we have
programs now that indicate that in high school we have
inventions we can use to teach literacy, to encourage students
to see the relevance and be able to read again and connect with
the world. If they are shut off at a very early age, and we
give up on them, we are going to have a group of people that
are not going to be encouraged to learn.
Years ago, there was a book written called Pygmalion in the
Classroom, and basically if we set our expectations for
students not to achieve, they are not going to achieve. And so
I think we have to turn ourselves around and understand that at
every step of the way if we engage the student, we believe in
them, we are their advocates, they will achieve, and I think we
have lost that in terms of our schools today, and I think we
need to regain that.
I would also say that if you want to talk about some things
that would encourage English as a second language and perhaps
even adult basic education, to look at such tax incentives as
Section 127, which is only allowable right now for college
degree credit. Why not allow some of that to also be used for
English-as-a-second-language training and adult basic education
so we can expand the opportunities of those individuals that do
not have those basic skills but need them to invest in the
workplace?
Mr. Bartlett. Bill Bennett, who was President Reagan's
secretary of education, tells a very interesting story. After
they decided that they were not going to be able to shut down
what they thought was an unconstitutional federal Department of
Education, they set about trying to determine what worked and
what did not work in education, and they found two schools. I
think they were both in Illinois. One of them spent twice as
much money per child as the other one, but the poor school, the
school that spent only half as much per child, year after year,
had higher achievement scores on the tests.
And so Bill Bennett went to visit these two high schools in
Illinois to see what was going on there, why the school that
had only half as much money for their kids every year scored
higher on the achievement tests. And when he arrived at the
school and met the principal, he said, How is it going? The
principal said, We have got it tough here. We do not have much
money. About all we can do is teach the three R's. And if you
will think about what we do with additional money when we give
it to our schools, almost always they commit it to something
that competes with the three R's.
The teachers do not want to teach any more hours in a day,
parents do not want their kids going to school any more days in
a year, and so when we give more money to education, think
about what happens to the additional money you give. Very
frequently, doesn't it support programs that compete with the
three R's? I think that it was no accident that this school
that had little money had kids that scored better because, as
the principal said, About all we can do here is teach the three
R's.
In a former life, I was privileged to teach for 24 years.
In this world, by the way, that is the closest you can come to
immortality because you live on in your students, and I value
those 24 years. And I noticed something that is more and more
lacking in our schools today. I think where there is no
discipline, there is no learning, and I think there is not
substitute for an inspired and inspiring teacher. And for all
of the years I taught, the most important person in the whole
school system to me was the janitor. He had the school open,
and it was warm, and he had some chalk on the chalkboard, and
that is all I needed. The rest of administration, they could
have been gone to some foreign country for a year's vacation;
it would not have mattered to me.
I think we need to get back to a real respect for
education. If you are going to respect education, you have got
to have discipline in the classroom. Where there is no
discipline, I do not think there is any learning, and I have
real trouble seeing discipline in many of our classrooms today.
Mr. McCarthy?
Mr. McCarthy. I think the key issue we are also missing is
the sense of community, the sense of community between
education and business. When you think of what happens with
workforce investment boards, those that are successful, there
is a direct tie to the skills that are being taught in the
school to those being sought by employers.
There seems to be the channelization of education and
employment rather than at the K-through-12 level because the
preparation is towards the next level of education, not
necessarily towards the next level of education and other
opportunities, whether they be trade and technical schools,
careers immediately without any additional formal education.
The community engagement and support, specifically the
business community's support and its recognition by junior
colleges, K-through-12 institutions, is going to be critical to
reestablishing what I think will be the appropriate cause and
effect associated with education. Absent that, we will continue
along separate paths where, to your point, literally, the
connection starts again at the graduate school, and by then, it
is maybe too late at times.
Mr. Bartlett. Don't you think that you get from your
children and your society what you appreciate? I think our
society is a long way from appreciating academic achievement.
When I was younger, a good academic achiever was known as a
``square,'' and he had trouble dating the pretty girls. Pretty
girls now play dumb so that they can get a date, and the bright
guys are known as ``geeks'' and ``nerds.'' Is that the current
terminology for bright guys? And they have trouble dating
pretty girls.
Don't you think that we I have some better success in our
schools if we told our society we really appreciate what you
are doing, and if we invited academic achievers to the White
House about as often as we invite athletic achievers there and
appreciate them? I just think that we do not appreciate
education in this country. We appreciate the results of
education, the entrepreneur, the guy who is developing all of
the new things, but he got there because he educated himself
very frequently in spite of an education system which continues
to turn out people that, in the words of Mr. Lewis, their
preparation was atrocious, was the best word he could use.
Mr. Joyce, was your grandfather's last name Bilco, or how
did he get the Bilco name for the door?
Mr. Joyce. His last name was Lyons, and his first company
was Builders Iron Company, so he took the B-I from that and the
L from the family name.
Mr. Bartlett. Okay. That is how he got. For those of you
who do not know the Bilco door, it is the standard, and if you
are going to put an outside-access door to your basement in a
house when you are building it,--in another life, I built homes
for about a dozen years, too--so you are going to buy a Bilco
door even though somebody else manufactured it. It was still a
Bilco door because your name was the characteristic name for
any door that served that function.
What do we need to do so that the product of our K through
12 comes somewhere near the product of our graduate schools,
which is clearly the best in the world?
Mr. Joyce. I have spent a lot of time in the classroom
encouraging students to consider careers in manufacturing. Most
are surprised that today's manufacturing environment is clean,
it is high tech, it is interesting. People work in clusters and
teams. They enjoy all of that. When they walk through our
plant, it is not anything like they have imagined. And when we
talk to eighth graders, as an example, about this Connecticut
State Scholars program and encouraging them to enroll in a more
rigorous curriculum so they can get the better job, they have
more opportunities after high school, we asked them a simple
question right up front: Where do you think, worldwide, the
United States stands in terms of math and science achievement?
And always the answer is one, two, or three in the world. Well,
we are actually 18th and 19th, respectively, in the world, and
they are shocked. How can that be?
Mr. Bartlett. Who is number one in the world?
Mr. Joyce. Five of the top six are Asian countries. I do
not know which is the first, but five of the top six are
Asians. One reason is that the culture in Asia regarding
education is far different than ours. They mostly attend school
six days a week, and it is another question I asked the
students: Who is the student athlete here? Okay, Jim. How often
do you practice your basketball? Well, every day, sir. Maybe
not Sunday, but six days a week. I said, Okay. Well, that is
how the students learn in Japan. They go to school six days a
week.
So you do not do that. You only go five days; sometimes you
go four, and as every week passes, you fall behind a Japanese
student, week after week after week. So what happens after four
years of high school? Where do you think they are compared to
us? They are number one. We are number 18. It stands to reason.
So you need to practice more, and to get there, we need to
challenge our students, we need to set our standards higher and
our expectations higher, and there is no question in my mind
that we can achieve those standards.
Mr. Bartlett. You mentioned the Orient and their
achievement. Several years ago, I was the commencement speaker
at our two high schools in Garrett County,--there are only
two--Southern High and Northern High, and Southern High had 200
graduates, and there was only one minority, and that was an
Indian girl, an Asian-Indian girl, and she was the
valedictorian. So in the afternoon, I went up to Northern High,
and there was only one minority student there, and that was
little Chinese girl, and she was carrying around a little
manilla folder. I said to my wife, I wonder can it be true that
she is the valedictorian? And sure enough, she was the
valedictorian. Now, there were two minority students, both
oriental, out of 335 kids, and they were the two top achievers.
I thought, gee, maybe there is a lesson there.
Mr. Volgenau?
Mr. Volgenau. My company for years has supported inner-city
learning centers where poor kids can come after school lets out
and receive both academic and ethical education, and we have
found, through that program, that there are several things that
make a difference. One is parental involvement. I am thinking
of our work particularly with the Darrell Green Youth Life
Foundation. Their parents have to be involved. They have a very
high success rate with their kids, and their parents must be
involved.
The other is role models, and ITAA studies again and again
have pointed out that particularly for women and minority
members, they need role models in the area of information
technology, and that makes a difference. As long as our role
models from a society standpoint are rock stars and super
athletes--I love athletics. I am still involved at my age in
athletics. I have always loved athletics, but the NCAA
announcement, they are proud to say, is 95 percent of our
athletes are going pro in a profession other than sports, and
that type of thing is important.
There is one other point, and that is I have got a Ph.D. in
computers and automation and engineering, and one thing that
has surprised me again and again and again about information
technology is it is never too late. Time and again, I have seen
people who have been only high school graduates who have had
the courage to get involved and just the perseverance and study
information technology, and they have become very, very good at
it, and I have seen many people who have graduated in the
liberal arts and have adapted themselves to leadership roles in
the area of information technology. So it is never too late.
We talk about communications. One of the problems with IT
is the lack of information or, correspondingly, the data glut.
There are a lot of government programs underway,--somebody
mentioned the smokestacks--but a lot of businesses just do not
know about them. And so ITAA for years has worked on community
partnerships which involve small businesses and community
colleges and the local community to try to get the information
out about these training programs that already are being
funded. There may not be enough nationwide, but there are
plenty of them, and there is plenty of infrastructure for
training in the area of IT.
One final point. We think of information technology as
being a bunch of PCs on desktops. That is just a very small
part of it. For each one of those types of computers that is
made, there is a hundred other computers that are embedded
within other machines to make them operate better.
So when we talk about mechanics and fixing cars, for
example, those folks, too, have to have some knowledge of what
happens when a computer fails, when the software fails. Thank
you.
Mr. Bartlett. You mentioned the involvement of parents.
Several years ago, I had the opportunity to visit with Steve
Forbes a small, black school in Baltimore. They would not admit
a child to the school until the family made a commitment to the
child's education. I was the commencement speaker at a
graduation. It was not a graduation; it was a celebration. The
diploma was given to the family, and then the family, the
caregiver, the family then gave the diploma to the graduate,
recognizing the contribution that the family made.
Another interesting thing about those graduates: Every one
went on to college because the principal said that they were
not ready to graduate until they had been accepted in at least
three colleges and had a scholarship to at least one college,
and they were not ready to graduate until they had reached
that.
So the involvement of the family is really, really very
important, and you see that.
Our district has the highest number of young people
admitted to our military academies, and in almost every case,
and these are really the best of the best because we have more
than 10 times as many apply as who are accepted in these
academies, and one year we had 33, so we have a great district,
but almost invariably they come from a family that gives great
family support, and so your emphasizing that and education is
one of the keys, I think.
Mr. Volgenau. I have just one comment. Please send them to
the Naval Academy.
Mr. Bartlett. We sent 17 that year to the Naval Academy.
Mr. Volgenau. Thank you.
Mr. Bartlett. It is in our district. It is in Maryland. I
represent a district just 50 miles north of here, and, of
course, our school is a Maryland school. That year, 17 out of
33, just a bit over half of the kids, went. You nominate 10 for
each slot. Ordinarily, you have one slot. That year we had two
slots in the Naval Academy. We nominated 20, and they accepted
17 that year, really quite a phenomenal record.
My colleague from New Jersey, Rodney Frelinghuysen, did an
op-ed piece saying that his district had the most young people
admitted to our military academies. He had fewer than we, so I,
with some confidence, can say that we probably have the most.
But the involvement of the family, I noticed, just visiting
those young people and their families and going to the awards.
It is great to go to the awards where other kids are getting a
$500 and a $1,000 scholarship, and I announce that they have
been living with a star who is qualified for a $250,000
scholarship. They always get the most applause--it is kind of
fun--at that ceremony.
Mr. Coffey?
Mr. Coffey. Well, I would just go to your point about what
made the four-year college and graduate curriculum work in the
United States, and I think there are two significant federal
policies that did that, the first being the Land Grant College
Act during the Civil War, which basically formed a bridge
between the agricultural industry in the United States and the
educational system to create a system that built support for
the small farm community in the United States and encouraged
states to have major educational institutions, and I think that
was the first major, significant, federal contribution to
graduate education.
The second major federal contribution, I think, was the GI
Bill of Rights after World War II in which you basically opened
higher education to a much broader potential audience than it
ever would have had before. And I think, with those two acts,
there was significant change in the educational system that
encouraged the growth of a really first-class, excellent
educational system at that level.
We have heaped great praise on both of those acts for
hundreds of years now, and they are held up, I think, as
examples of where federal intervention did, in fact, change
America rather dramatically. I do not feel we have had anything
like that in elementary and secondary education.
Mr. Bartlett. Some of the best courses I took at the
University of Maryland were in the department of agriculture.
It is a land-grant college, and my best endocrinology course
was reproduction in poultry, so I am appreciative of the
contribution of land-grant colleges.
Before we get comments from our last two panel members, Ms.
Velazquez has a couple of questions she would like to ask.
Ms. Velazquez. No.
Mr. Bartlett. Okay. After you. Okay. Mr. Peers?
Mr. Peers. Yes. I want to hone in on the ability to connect
young adults to what they are actually going to experience in
the workplace. Each of my colleagues here has talked about
that. So I would say is how do we increase opportunities for
experiential learning, and how do we start that early enough so
that students, young adults, get exposed to different careers
and opportunities? Encourage co-op programs and so forth.
Encourage opportunities to work part time and go to school part
time even in high school. I was fortunate enough to start
working at a very early age, and it exposed me to a lot of
different opportunities.
Another thing I would do--we try and get more and more
businesses, at least in our broker role at the chamber, to come
into the schools and to be part of what is happening. You know,
you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, about teaching, and with all due
respect, I submit you might have done this backwards, that
someone of your experience and knowledge, after you have done
all of these things that you have done, including served in
Congress, would have a lot to offer now as a teacher.
Mr. Bartlett. Well, I am only 78. I may go back.
Mr. Peers. There you go. And I really believe that a lot of
people go into education, and that is their only field. So
teachers and guidance counselors are not exposed to what most
students are going to face in the real world of work.
So how do we bring people who have already experienced the
world of work in many different capacities, in many different
ways, and how do we bring them into the schools so that they
could share this knowledge, share this wisdom, share this
expertise in a way that exposes more and more of our young
adults to what they are going to face? So I think we could look
at that.
And then, just lastly, I think we need to stop thinking it
is an either/or, the either/or being you go on to graduate
school or you do nothing. There are plenty of occupations that
are not going to require advanced degrees. There are plenty of
occupations that are going to require a very good, solid,
vocational education, and to what degree do we concentrate on
core competencies that are going to lend themselves to those
types of occupations? If you want to be a mechanic, you do need
such things as critical thinking skills, creative problem-
solving skills, and that needs to be part of your curriculum
when you are working with these young adults, and you have to
encourage them that there are other opportunities other than
just going to college.
Mr. Bartlett. I appreciate you mentioning these job
opportunities. We are now having to import those skills because
there are far too few people with these skills available in our
country, and it is because, again, we do not appreciate that.
I built homes for 12 years. At the end of the day, if I had
done it right, it is going to be there a hundred years from
now. Most of the laws we pass in Congress, I hope, are not here
a hundred years from now. It is really a lot of satisfaction in
those trades, and we just are not appreciating them and not
incenting our young people to go into them.
Mr. Caslin?
Mr. Caslin. Thank you. A couple of things on universities.
How do they measure quality? I have had a number of
conversations with leaders across the country of universities,
and they measure it in endowment dollar per student. That is
one key measure, and what that means is resources to the
student.
M.F.T.E. works with a number of universities who have no
bridge to the community, that even though they have billions of
dollars in endowment and resources for their faculty and their
students, the communities that surround them are in great need,
and there is no bridge.
In fact, I would like to quote one of our students who grew
up in west Philadelphia, and because of the NFTE program and
the University of Pennsylvania Wharton Business School, he, as
a junior in high school, learned how to start his own business.
He then became turned on to finance. He went to Morehouse
College, majored in finance. He was recruited by Morgan
Stanley, went to Morgan Stanley in New York, worked there. He
was recruited by Goldman Sachs, moved to London, worked for
Goldman Sachs, and then at the ripe old age of 26, moved back
to Brooklyn in Clinton Hill and basically now employs 20 people
in the largest supper club, soul food supper club, in Brooklyn.
It is called the Five Spot Soul Food Takeout and Supper Club.
And Malik Armstead said, `Knowledge is key; knowledge is
power.`
`I think you raised the issue, as did Daniel Webster years
ago: Knowledge is the true sun of the universe, for on it life
and power dance in every beam.`
We have found, through Gallup polls, 80 percent of students
in America want to learn how to be entrepreneurs, want to
control their destiny, want to get in the marketplace, and very
few have access to it. That is why NFTE started. We started
because teachers could hardly get the resources they needed
just to do their core, and we went out and raised $180,000 our
first year and now have raised nearly $70 million from the
private sector over 16 years to bring entrepreneurship literacy
to young people to turn them on to life.
We are in India because of job riots. Imagine in northern
India where the education system is working, where you have
10,000 young adults turning out with the equivalent of 1,500 on
their SATs showing up for 300 or 400 jobs and people being
killed in the stampede on a job riot. Two people from that
community, Jaipur, came to NFTE. They had retired from the
business world here in the States, and they said, We cannot sit
by and retire, retirement in New Jersey, and see our homeland
and a superior education system have this type of stress and
conflict. Why can't we promote more entrepreneurship in
northern India?
N.F.T.E. is replicating in Germany, which has a very rigid,
very strong math and science achievement because there are over
200,000 20-year-olds who are unemployed and without a
certificate.
What we are seeing in many of the accomplished systems with
high achievement, there is really no entrepreneurial thinking,
there is no marketplace penetration and embrace, and even in
the U.K., if you do not test well at the age of 10, you are put
onto a track fairly to oblivion. We have seen that in South
Africa in Tanzania where, again, education systems have certain
criteria and certain filter systems at a very young age which
do not give young people the chance to recover or even tap
their potential.
So there is a flexibility to the U.S. education system
which gives late bloomers a chance, and I think that is
positive. There is a rigidity in some of the more formal
systems across the world. The British education system, de
facto, influences 60 countries through the commonwealth. It is
fascinating to see that. That is why we started in London to
understand how this education system works and how we can bring
entrepreneurship education, and we have seen that there is one
department of education and labor that coordinates the whole
country, the whole United Kingdom, and so our ability to
promote an idea is actually more effective and efficient in
that way, whereas in the United States, the ability to promote
and develop NFTE over 16 years, we have had to navigate the
U.S. federal departments, the state departments of education,
and then the local districts' education, superintendents,
school-based management with principals. So you have 16,000
school districts that are starting to come to somewhat of the
same page, but they are very, very, very decentralized.
So it is an interesting struggle, and I think the biggest
aspect goes back to what is the end game, and for NFTE, we see
the end game as the number of productive and responsible, self-
governing people per capita in a community. The more you can
build that up, the more you have a chance for a safe and
prosperous and just community. The more those numbers decline,
the more you have people imprisoned by the tyranny of the few.
Mr. Bartlett. You mentioned entrepreneurship and its
importance. We are one person out of 22 in the world in
America, and we have a fourth of all of the good things in the
world. We use a fourth of the world's energy. We represent a
fourth of the world's economy, and I think that
entrepreneurship has largely been responsible for that.
I think the reason that entrepreneurship has flourished
here is because of our enormous respect for the rights of the
individual. Implicit in our Constitution and very explicit in
the first 10 amendments, which is why our founding fathers in
1791 felt compelled to make explicit what was clearly implicit
in the Constitution. And as government gets bigger, and we have
more of us, and we need more regulations, that respect for the
rights of the individual is at risk, and I think that to the
extent that that is at risk, our society is at risk.
What you need to go along with that entrepreneurship, which
we are fantastic at, is an education so that you can do
something with that entrepreneurial spirit, and that is what we
have been talking about in today's hearing, our failure, not in
the graduate schools,--we are doing fantastic there--but at the
lower levels to educate.
Ms. Velazquez, and then I have one final question to ask
before we thank you for your testimony.
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Buehlmann, I want to go back to the Federal Workforce
Development programs, and maybe you recall the question that
was posed by Mr. Udall to Ms. DeRocco mentioning the study that
was conducted by the Office of Advocacy, SBA Advocacy, that
shows that small businesses really do not participate in those
programs that are available for them. Why do you think that
Federal Workforce Development programs have such a hard time
getting small businesses to participate?
Ms. Buehlmann. I believe we provided to each of you a copy
of our ``Rising to the Challenge Survey,'' and the thing that
we found most prevalent in terms of answering that question is
lack of awareness. So one of the things we are trying to do
through our work is really generate awareness through chambers
across this country to the resources that are available in
communities to help small- and medium-sized businesses with
their workforce-development concerns, issues, and requirements.
It is the number one issue that they raise consistently, is how
do we create a workforce system that works so that we can
participate and get the skilled and quality workers that we
need?
Ms. Velazquez. But given the fact that we do have some
programs that some of them have been either zeroed out, flat
funded, but there are some that still have been funded------.
Ms. Buehlmann. We have found, over time, that there is
greater awareness. It has gone from 5 percent to 40 percent in
terms of the surveys that we have done. We have also found that
those who use it, and that is about half of the 40 percent have
used it with any regularity, are very satisfied with the
services they receive. So I go back to, even the National
Association of Manufacturers and Jobs to the Future, a Boston-
based firm that we coordinate with in one of our particular
efforts--all of them found it is this issue of lack of
awareness.
Ms. Velazquez. Does that mean that the federal government,
the Department of Labor and other agencies need to do a better
job in terms of outreach?
Ms. Buehlmann. From our perspective, that is very
important, that there needs to be greater communication about
the benefits of using the publicly funded workforce system and
other resources in communities, that we need a better
understanding and put a different face to those. Randy Peers
mentioned, for example, that they view them as a social
service. Another thing that came out in this survey is that
more and more of them are viewing it as an economic-development
concern and issue, and connecting it to economic development is
really a way to better engage business.
We also believe that if you put a business face to it, you
create a communication mechanism by which you present the
business case, which ultimately gets the workers they need but
also gets the jobs that individuals need with family-sustaining
wages, that it is a win-win for everybody in the community.
So we believe that creating awareness, creating different
kinds of outreach, putting the business case to it, which we
can do, and talking about it is a way not only to hire
individuals but to retain them, to advance them, and allow them
to gain greater skills and connection to the workplace is
really the way that we need to go.
Ms. Velazquez. Did you share that survey with the
Department of Labor?
Ms. Buehlmann. Yes, and, in fact, part of what Ms. DeRocco
was talking about funded this particular survey, in fact, 3,700
small- and medium-sized businesses through 70 communities
throughout the country.
Ms. Velazquez. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. Rather than ask you to respond, I
just want to make a couple of comments and ask if you might
respond for the record because what I want to spend just a
moment or two on is a conundrum that I have been concerned with
for quite a while now. We have been losing our manufacturing
jobs for a long while now, and we are moving to a service-based
economy. We are still doing pretty well as far as quality of
life is concerned, but if you push this to an absurdity,
clearly, it cannot go on forever. If all we do is take in each
other's laundry and cut each other's hair, obviously, that is
not a prescription for a viable economy, is it?
I understand that wealth is created in only three kinds of
activities in our society, in any society. It is created by
farming, it is created by mining, and it is created by
manufacturing. We have been talking an awful lot today about
IT, information technology, and that involves largely computers
and moving little electrons around, and I note that you cannot
eat them, you cannot wear them, you cannot ride on them. They
will not keep the rain off your head. Clearly, IT is a support
technology, and unless that IT is used for agriculture, for
mining, or for manufacturing, ultimately it really is not
creating wealth, is it?
And I note that our trade deficit last year was $489
billion. Our debt went up last year in this country $700
billion. They will tell you the deficit was $500 billion, but
the debt went up $700 billion, and I think that if the debt
went up $700 billion, there was a $700 billion deficit. The
other 200, by the way, is the monies we take from the trust
fund, and we pretend that they are not debt. It is the most
significant we owe because we owe it to our kids and our grand
kids, and shame on us because that debt is getting bigger and
bigger, and we are living quite well today at their expense
because when it comes their turn, not only will they have to
run government on current revenues; they will have to pay back
all of the money that we have borrowed from their generation.
I promised, 12 years ago, when I was running that I would
conduct myself so my kids and grand kids would not come and
spit on my grave because of what I had done to their country. I
am still trying to keep that pledge.
Well, if it is true that wealth only comes from farming and
from manufacturing and from mining, how did we get from where
we are, with this enormous obsession with moving electrons
around, to a society which is really producing wealth? I would
like you to comment on it, if you would, for the record because
we have imposed on your time more than we really should have.
I want to thank you all very much for a very interesting
session, and we stand in adjournment.
[Whereupon, at 5:00 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]