[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                  RISING TO THE CHALLENGE: THE FUTURE
                   OF HIGHER EDUCATION POST COVID-19

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                          HIGHER EDUCATION AND
                          WORKFORCE INVESTMENT

                                 OF THE

                    COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

             HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 17, 2021

                               __________

                            Serial No. 117-2

                               __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                                  

        Available via: edlabor.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov

                               __________
                               

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
43-870 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                               

                    COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR

             ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia, Chairman

RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona            VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina,
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut              Ranking Member
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,      JOE WILSON, South Carolina
  Northern Mariana Islands           GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania
FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida         TIM WALBERG, Michigan
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
MARK TAKANO, California              ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina        RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
MARK De SAULNIER, California         JIM BANKS, Indiana
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey          JAMES COMER, Kentucky
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington          RUSS FULCHER, Idaho
JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York          FRED KELLER, Pennsylvania
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania             GREGORY F. MURPHY, North Carolina
LUCY Mc BATH, Georgia                MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut            BURGESS OWENS, Utah
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan                 BOB GOOD, Virginia
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota                LISA C. Mc CLAIN, Michigan
HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan           DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico   MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
MONDAIRE JONES, New York             VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
KATHY E. MANNING, North Carolina     SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin
FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana              MADISON CAWTHORN, North Carolina
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York, Vice-Chair  MICHELLE STEEL, California
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin                Vacancy
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas                Vacancy
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
KWEISI MFUME, Maryland

                   Veronique Pluviose, Staff Director
                  Cyrus Artz, Minority Staff Director
                                 ------                                

       SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT

                FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida, Chairwoman

MARK TAKANO, California              GREGORY F. MURPHY, North Carolina
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington            Ranking Member
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota                GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico   ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
MONDAIRE JONES, New York             JIM BANKS, Indiana
KATHY E. MANNING, North Carolina     JAMES COMER, Kentucky
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York              RUSS FULCHER, Idaho
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin                MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas                BOB GOOD, Virginia
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey           LISA C. Mc CLAIN, Michigan
ARIANO ESPAILLAT, New York           DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona            VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut            Vacancy
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina (ex 
ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia      officio)
  (ex officio)
                            
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on March 17, 2021...................................     1

Statement of Members:
    Wilson, Hon. Frederica S., Chairwoman, Subcommittee on 
      Education and Workforce Investment.........................     1
        Prepared statement of....................................     5
     Murphy, Hon. Gregory F., Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
      Education and Workforce Investment.........................     6
        Prepared statement of....................................     8

Statement of Witnesses:
    Burke, Lindsey M., Ph.D., Director, Center for Education 
      Policy, and Mark A. Kolokotrones Fellow in Education, The 
      Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC........................    19
        Prepared statement of....................................    22
    Oakley, Eloy Ortiz, Chancellor, California Community 
      Colleges,
      Sacramento, CA.............................................    14
        Prepared statement of....................................    17
    Thornton, Keith, Student, Florida International University, 
      Miami, FL..................................................    11
        Prepared statement of....................................    13
    Zibel, Daniel A., Vice President and Chief Counsel, National 
      Student Legal Defense Network, Washington, DC..............    29
        Prepared statement of....................................    31

Additional Submissions:
    Bonamici, Hon. Suzanne, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Oregon:
        Report dated May 19, 2020 from the Brookings Institution, 

          ``Commercials for College? Advertising in Higher 
          Education''............................................    86
    Jones, Hon. Mondaire, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of New York:
        Report dated October, 2020 from National Student Legal 
          Defense, ``Protection and the Unseen: Holding 
          Executives Personally Liable under the Higher Eduction 
          Act''..................................................   109
    Leger Fernandez, Hon. Teresa, a Representative in Congress 
      from the State of New Mexico:
        Article dated March 16, 2021 from the Santa Fe Reporter: 
          New Mexico College Students Face Food Insecurity''.....   106
        Link: GAO Report 19-95 dated December 21, 2018, ``FOOD 
          INSECURITY: Better Information Could Help Eligible 
          College 
          Students Access Federal Food Assistance Benefits''.....   108
    Omar, Hon. Ilhan, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of 
      Minnesota:
        Link: GAO Report 19-522 dated August 19, 2020, ``Higher 
          Education: More Information Could Help Student Parents 
          Access Additional Federal Student Aid''................   106
    Questions submitted for the record by:
        Banks, Hon. Jim, a Representative in Congress from the 
          State of Indiana.......................................   126
        Fulcher, Hon. Russ, a a Representative in Congress from 
          the State of Idaho.....................................   126
        Harshbarger, Hon. Diana, a a Representative in Congress 
          from the State of Tennessee............................ 126-7
        Sherrill, Hon. Mikie, a Representative in Congress from 
          the State of New Jersey 



    Responses to questions submitted for the record by:
        Dr. Burke................................................   128
        Mr. Oakley...............................................   134
        Mr. Zibel................................................   140

 
 RISING TO THE CHALLENGE: THE FUTURE OF HIGHER EDUCATION POST COVID-19

                              ----------                              


                       Wednesday, March 17, 2021

                  House of Representatives,
                      Subcommittee on Education and
                              Workforce Investment,
                          Committee on Education and Labor,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:03 p.m., via 
Zoom, Hon. Frederica Wilson (Chairwoman of the subcommittee) 
presiding.
    Present: Representatives Wilson, Takano, Jayapal, Omar, 
Leger Fernandez, Jones, Manning, Bowman, Pocan, Castro, 
Sherrill, Courtney, Bonamici, Scott (ex officio), Murphy, 
Grothman, Banks, Comer, Fulcher, Miller-Meeks, Good, McClain, 
Harshbarger, Spartz, and Foxx (ex officio).
    Staff present: Tylease Alli, Chief Clerk; Katie Berger, 
Profession Staff; Ilana Brunner, General Counsel; Sheila 
Havenner, Director of Information Technology; Eli Hovland, 
Policy Associate; Ariel Jones, Policy Associate; Andre Lindsay, 
Policy Associate; Max Moore, Staff Assistant; Mariah Mowbray, 
Clerk/Special Assistant to the Staff Director; Kayla 
Pennebecker, Staff Assistant; Veronique Pluviose, Staff 
Director; Benjamin Sinoff, Director of Education Oversight; 
Banyon Vassar, Deputy Director of Information Technology; 
Claire Viall, Professional Staff; Cyrus Artz, Minority Staff 
Director; Kelsey Avino , Minority Professional Staff Member; 
Courtney Butcher, Minority Director of Member Services and 
Coalitions; Amy Raaf Jones, Minority Director of Education and 
Human Resources Policy; Dean Johnson, Minority Legislative 
Assistant; Hannah Matesic, Minority Director of Operations; 
Carlton Norwood, Minority Press Secretary; Alex Ricci, Minority 
Professional Staff Member; Chance Russell, Minority Legislative 
Assistant; and Mandy Schaumburg, Minority Chief Counsel and 
Deputy Director of Education Policy.
    Chairwoman Wilson. The Subcommittee on Education and 
Workforce Investment will come to order. I believe we have a 
quorum call. We have a Member who is being waived on the 
committee. He's not a Member of the committee, but after each 
of the Members speak he will be able to participate.
    I want to welcome everyone. I note that a quorum is 
present, so that's great. Everybody is on time and ready. The 
subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on the future 
of higher education post COVID-19. And you will notice that 
some of the women are wearing white. This is a special day for 
us, this particular suffrage day.
    This is an entirely remote hearing. All microphones will be 
kept muted as a general rule to avoid unnecessary background 
noise. Members and witnesses they'll be responsible for 
unmuting themselves when they are recognized to speak, or when 
they wish to seek recognition.
    I also ask that Members please identify themselves before 
they speak, so call out your name before you speak. Members 
should keep their cameras on while in the proceeding. Members 
shall be considered present in the proceeding when they are 
visible on camera and they shall be considered not present when 
they are not visible on camera.
    The only exception to this is if they are experiencing 
technical difficulty and inform committee Staff of such 
difficulty. If any Member experiences technical difficulties 
during the hearing you should stay connected on the platform, 
make sure that you are muted, and use your phone to immediately 
call the committee's IT director, whose number was provided to 
you in advance.
    Should the Chair experience technical difficulty I'll need 
to stop. If I have to step away to vote on the floor 
Representative Mark Takano as a Member of this subcommittee, or 
another Majority Member of the subcommittee, if he is not 
available, is hereby authorized to assume the gavel in the 
Chair's absence.
    This is an entirely remote hearing and as such the 
committee's hearing room is officially closed. Members who 
choose to sit with their individual devices in the hearing room 
must wear headphones to avoid feedback, echoes, and distortion 
resulting from sitting in the same room.
    Members are also expected to adhere to social distancing 
and safe healthcare guidelines, including the use of masks, 
hand sanitizers, and wiping down their areas before and after 
their presence in the hearing room.
    In order to ensure that the committee's five-minute rule is 
adhered to, staff will be keeping track of time using the 
committee's field timer. The field timer will appear in its own 
thumbnail picture and will be named 001_timer. There will be no 
one minute remaining warning. The field timer will sound its 
audio alarm when time is up.
    Members and witnesses are asked to wrap up promptly when 
their time has expired. While a roll call is not necessary to 
establish a quorum in official proceedings conducted remotely 
or with remote participation, the committee has made it a 
practice whenever there is an official proceeding with remote 
participation for the Clerk to call the roll and help make 
clear who is present at the start of the proceeding.
    Members should say their name before announcing they are 
present. This helps the Clerk, and also helps those watching 
the platform and the live stream who may experience a few 
seconds delay.
    At this time I ask the Clerk to call the roll.
    The Clerk. Ms. Wilson?
    Chairwoman Wilson. Ms. Wilson is here.
    The Clerk. Mr. Takano?
    Mr. Takano. Present.
    The Clerk. Ms. Jayapal?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Omar?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Leger Fernandez?
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Ms. Leger Fernandez is here.
    The Clerk. Mr. Jones?
    Mr. Jones. Here.
    The Clerk. Ms. Manning?
    Ms. Manning. Ms. Manning is here.
    The Clerk. Mr. Bowman?
    Mr. Bowman. Mr. Bowman is here.
    The Clerk. Mr. Pocan?
    Mr. Pocan. Mark Pocan's here.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sherill?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Espaillat?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Grijalva?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Courtney?
    Mr. Courtney. Courtney's here.
    The Clerk. Ms. Bonamici?
    Ms. Bonamici. Ms. Bonamici's present.
    The Clerk. Mr. Murphy?
    Mr. Murphy. Murphy is present.
    The Clerk. Mr. Grothman?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Stefanik?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Banks?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Comer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Fulcher?
    Mr. Fulcher. Fulcher's here.
    The Clerk. Ms. Miller-Meeks?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Good?
    Mr. Good. Good is here.
    The Clerk. Ms. McClain?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Harshbarger?
    Ms. Harshbarger. I'm present.
    The Clerk. Ms. Spartz?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Chairwoman Wilson that concludes the roll call. 
I just wanted to add in here thank you Cheryl, thanks.
    Ms. Foxx. Madam Chair, this is Virginia Foxx. I am present 
also and I love your hat today.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. Pursuant 
to Committee Rules agency opening statements are limited to the 
Chair and the Ranking Member. This allows us to hear from our 
witnesses sooner and provide Members with adequate time to ask 
questions.
    I recognize myself now for the purpose of making an opening 
statement. But before I do that I just have to say that I want 
to welcome especially Keith Thornton. Keith is one of your 
witnesses and you will hear from him shortly, but he is a 
member of the 5,000 Role Models of Excellence Projects that I 
have been bragging about to all of you for years, especially to 
you Representative Foxx.
    Now I didn't want my time to start until now. Today we meet 
to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher 
education and what we can do to expand access to quality higher 
education. I want to start by reaffirming a well-established 
fact that the foundation of our work that a college degree is 
the surest pathway to financial security and a rewarding 
career.
    That is why as a Miami Dade County School Board Member, I 
led the creation of the 5,000 Role Models of Excellence 
Project, an in-school mentoring and dropout prevention program 
that has helped prepare thousands of black boys for higher 
education and adulthood.
    Unfortunately, the COVID 19 pandemic has created new 
barriers to postsecondary degrees. Campus closures and the 
abrupt transition to online platforms saved lives. But we know 
that remote instruction has also made it harder for students 
across the country to access and complete college.
    These consequences have not been felt evenly. As with every 
other facet of our society, Americans who entered the pandemic 
with fewer resources were disproportionately impacted by the 
disruption to in person instruction.
    Research indicates that achievement gaps between black and 
white students are wider in online classes than traditional 
settings. And on campus resources that underserved students 
normally rely on, like computer labs and reliable high speed 
internet, are restricted while campuses are closed.
    Now, fewer students--particularly fewer low-income students 
and students of color are pursuing a higher education. Social, 
psychological, and economic hardships have also forced many 
students to drop out during the pandemic. And now we know 
students who discontinue their education are more likely to 
default on student loans, and less likely to re-enroll which 
lowers their chances of increased lifetime earnings.
    Institutions are also facing unprecedented state and local 
budget shortfalls which have already caused drastic funding 
cuts and cost more than 300,000 higher education jobs. In 
addition, decreased enrollment and campus closures are eroding 
schools' revenue.
    For example, undergraduate enrollment at community colleges 
is down 10 percent compared to before the pandemic. Consider 
that when the pandemic started many institutions were still 
recovering from state budget cuts made during the Great 
Recession.
    To address these challenges, Congress secured urgent 
funding for higher education by passing three major relief 
packages: The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security 
Act, or CARES Act; the Coronavirus Response and Relief 
Supplemental Appropriations Act, and just last week the 
American Rescue Plan.
    This combined investment of more than 75 billion dollars 
has helped our higher education system avert an existential 
crisis. This relief is helping institutions maintain basic 
operations, keep staff on payroll, and prepare for reopening 
safely, and it is helping students avoid hunger, homelessness, 
and other hardships.
    Importantly, these relief packages also secured critical 
funding for state and local governments, supporting our 
nation's public institutions, the workers they employ, and the 
communities they support.
    While this relief may have saved our higher education 
system from financial calamity, justice demands that the 
Federal Government do more, far more, to address the 
longstanding disparities that have been exacerbated by the 
pandemic.
    For example, as institution access COVID-19 relief funding, 
we must strengthen institutional oversight to prevent waste and 
protect students from predatory for-profit schools. These 
institutions have a well-documented record of using taxpayer 
dollars to target vulnerable students during economic 
downturns, leaving them with worthless degrees and unreasonable 
loans. We cannot allow history to repeat itself.
    Congress must also take bold action to lower the cost of 
college. It's too expensive. This includes creating a federal 
and state partnership that incentivizes states to reinvest in 
their public institutions and offer free community college. And 
it includes expanding Pell Grants, the cornerstone of federal 
student aid, and so that fewer students that have to take 
take--fewer will have to take out student loans.
    As the Subcommittee has already established, this pandemic 
is not only testing our students and institutions. It is also 
testing Congress's commitment to ensuring that all students 
have access to safe, affordable, and quality education.
    Today I look forward to discussing what we must do to rise 
to that challenge. I want to thank our witnesses again, for 
being with us and I now yield to the Ranking Member Mr. Murphy 
for his opening statement. Mr. Murphy, Representative Murphy.
    [The statement of Chairwoman Wilson follows:]

  Statement of Hon. Frederica S. Wilson, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on 
                   Education and Workforce Investment

    Today, we meet to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on 
higher education and what we can do to expand access to quality higher 
education.
    I want to start by reaffirming a well-established fact at the 
foundation of our work-that a college degree is the surest pathway to 
financial security and a rewarding career.
    That is why, as a Miami-Dade County School Board Member, I led the 
creation of the 5,000 Role Models of Excellence Project, an in-school 
mentoring and drop-out prevention program that has helped prepare 
thousands of black boys for higher education and adulthood.
    Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has created new barriers to a 
postsecondary degree.
    Campus closures and the abrupt transition to online platforms saved 
lives. But we know that remote instruction has also made it harder for 
students across the country to access and complete college.
    These consequences have not been felt evenly. As with every other 
facet of our society, Americans who entered the pandemic with fewer 
resources were disproportionately impacted by the disruption to in-
person instruction.
    Research indicates that achievement gaps between Black and white 
students are wider in online classes than traditional settings. And on-
campus resources that underserved students normally rely on, like 
computer labs and reliable high-speed internet, are restricted while 
campuses are closed.
    Now, fewer students-particularly fewer low-income students and 
students of color-are pursuing a higher education at all.
    Social, psychological, and economic hardships have also forced many 
students to drop out during the pandemic. And we know students who 
discontinue their education are more likely to default on student loans 
and less likely to re-enroll, which lowers their chances of increased 
lifetime earnings.
    Institutions are also facing unprecedented State and local budget 
shortfalls, which have already caused drastic funding cuts and cost 
more than 300,000 higher education jobs. In addition, decreased 
enrollment and campus closures are eroding schools' revenue. For 
example, undergraduate enrollment at community colleges is down 10 
percent compared to before the pandemic. Consider that, when the 
pandemic started, many institutions were still recovering from State 
budget cuts made during the Great Recession.
    To address these challenges, Congress secured urgent funding for 
higher education by passing three major relief packages:

   the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or 
        CARES Act,

   the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental 
        Appropriations Act, and, just last week,

   the American Rescue Plan Act.

    This combined investment of more than $75 billion has helped our 
higher education system avert an existential crisis. The relief is 
helping institutions maintain basic operations, keep staff on payroll, 
and prepare for reopening safely. And it is helping students avoid 
hunger, homelessness, and other hardships.
    Importantly, these relief packages also secured critical funding 
for State and local governments, supporting our nation's public 
institutions, the workers they employ, and the communities they 
support.
    While this relief may have saved our higher education system from 
financial calamity, justice demands that the Federal Government do far 
more to address the longstanding disparities that have been exacerbated 
by the pandemic.
    For example, as institutions access COVID-19 relief funding, we 
must strengthen institutional oversight to prevent waste and protect 
students from predatory for-profit schools. These institutions have a 
well-documented record of using taxpayer dollars to target vulnerable 
students during economic downturns, leaving them with worthless degrees 
and unreasonable loans. We cannot allow history to repeat itself.
    Congress must also take bold action to lower the cost of college. 
This includes creating a Federal and State partnership that 
incentivizes States to reinvest in their public institutions and offer 
free community college. And it includes expanding Pell Grants, the 
cornerstone of Federal student aid, so that fewer students have to take 
out student loans.
    As the subcommittee has already established, this pandemic is not 
only testing our students and institutions. It is also testing 
Congress's commitment to ensuring that all students have access to 
safe, affordable, and quality education.
    Today, I look forward to discussing what we must do to rise to that 
challenge.
    I want to thank our witnesses, again, for being with us and I now 
yield to the Ranking Member, Mr. Murphy, for his opening Statement.
                                 ______
                                 
    Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Chairwoman Wilson. I appreciate the 
opportunity. I love your hat also and I look forward to the 
opportunity of working with you. I enjoyed our conversation the 
other day. I think we have so much common ground to work on. I 
could not agree with you more that individuals and minorities 
and rural communities have been disproportionately affected by 
this because of school closures, all of the more reason to get 
our kids back in school.
    America's higher education system has been in desperate 
reform for years. The systems weaknesses were further 
exacerbated by this pandemic. There are many pathways to 
success besides the traditional Baccalaureate degree, and 
institutions opposed to secondary education need to realize 
that fact if they hope to have the students thrive in the 
coming decades.
    I could not also Chairwoman, agree with you more about the 
affordability of colleges. They've gone unchecked without 
reducing costs for years and I look forward to working with you 
on that, nothing specific. We're not here today to discuss 
whether higher education needs reform, as I think everybody on 
this committee agrees so.
    According to one analysis, four in ten Baccalaureate degree 
recipients are underemployed in their first jobs after school, 
and roughly 60 percent of students it takes at least six years 
to complete their degree program. Certainly, these numbers are 
not worth celebrating.
    Now is not the time to expand on policies that have failed 
us from government before. And while Congress does play a role 
in improving all forms of postsecondary education, it should 
not take the form of expensive government handouts that push 
unworkable partisan priorities, and priorities that have shown 
that government has led to the increased cost of education.
    When COVID-19 placed heavy strains on our higher education 
system Congress acted quickly to provide the necessary funding 
for educational institutions to combat this once in a century, 
and hopefully, once in a much longer-term pandemic.
    Under President Trump, Congress allocated 35 billion 
dollars, that's 35 with a B towards these efforts. Republicans 
do not take spending taxpayer dollars lightly, which is why my 
Republican colleagues voted against the Democrat led budget 
reconciliation bill.
    We wanted to help people, but unfortunately this was pushed 
before unilateral with a large spending bill. But these 
unprecedented levels of taxpayer money being funneled into 
educational institutions, combined with valid concerns about 
return on investment. It is imperative that Congress take a 
close look at how the Department of Education and institutions 
of higher learning spend hard earned taxpayer dollars, and 
consider necessary structural reform to the Higher Education 
Act to serve students better.
    I'm disappointed that we're not going into this further, 
and this hearing is seemingly having a lack of actual and 
necessary oversight because I believe that is our purpose. We 
have a responsibility to diligently and responsibly allocate 
taxpayer dollars to those who truly need assistance. Too many 
on this committee find it too easy to spend hard earned 
taxpayer dollars without promising accountability.
    I have no problem with us investing in our students, but we 
have to hold institutions accountable. As a committee our 
loyalty should be to all students, present and future. Any 
conversations surrounding postsecondary education must aim to 
reduce the cost of attendance, and boost graduation rates while 
at the same time supporting students to pursue the type of 
education that works for them. It is not a one size fits all.
    And that means whether it be seeking a Baccalaureate 
degree, or pursuing an equally valuable skill based 
alternative, such as a career in technical education or 
apprenticeships that lead to in demand good paying jobs.
    Before the pandemic, there were over 7 million unfilled 
jobs in the United States, in part due to a skills gap. With 
employers in desperate need for qualified employees, now is the 
time more than ever, to strengthen all learning opportunities 
that provide students with skills and the necessary knowledge 
to succeed in the workforce.
    This type of strategy will not only benefit students, but 
will boost our entire economy. Higher education is in a state 
of emergency, but we cannot allow this to turn into an excuse 
to nationalize the entire postsecondary education system. The 
U.S. Constitution grants no authority over education to the 
Federal Government. Education is not mentioned in the 
Constitution and for a good reason.
    The founders wanted most aspects of our lives to be managed 
by those closest to them, either by State, or local or by 
family, businesses, and other elements of society. Certainly, 
they saw no role for the Federal Government in education.
    Now if we're going to be involved in education, we ought to 
expect specific financial and productive return on our 
investment and not put students into oblivion of debt. 
Committee Republicans are focused on supporting students and 
completing affordable, postsecondary education that will 
prepare them to enter the workforce with the skills that they 
need for life long learning, and life long success.
    We ought to work together, and I mean collaboration, to 
give students access to educational options that will prepare 
them to enter the workforce with the skills they need for that 
lifelong success. Students need pathways, not partisanship, and 
it is my hope and my expectation that this is a step in a 
productive and a bipartisan direction.
    Again thank you all for being here. I look forward to 
discussing reforms for higher education that increase student 
access without expensive government handouts, partisan 
programs. And I want to thank the Chairwoman for a wonderful 
discussion. As I said next week I look forward to working on 
trying to do great things for our students in education, and 
provide all students with a wonderful means of pathway to 
success. Thank you, and I will yield back.
    [The statement of Ranking Member Murphy follows:]

 Statement of Hon. Gregory F. Murphy, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
                   Education and Workforce Investment

    Thank you, Madam Chair and thank you to all our witnesses for 
joining us here today.
    America's higher education system has been in desperate need of 
reform for years. The system's weaknesses were further exacerbated by 
the COVID-19 pandemic. There are many pathways to success besides the 
traditional baccalaureate degree, and institutions of postsecondary 
education need to realize this fact if they hope to help their students 
thrive in the coming decades.
    We are not here today to discuss whether higher education needs 
reform, as both sides can agree that the system needs work. According 
to one analysis, four in ten baccalaureate-degree recipients are 
underemployed in their first jobs after school. Roughly 60 percent of 
students complete their degree program within 6 years. Certainly, these 
are not numbers worth celebrating.
    Now is not the time to expand on failed, big government policies. 
While Congress has a role to play in improving all forms of 
postsecondary education, it should not take the form of expensive 
government handouts that push unworkable, partisan priorities.
    When COVID-19 placed heavy strains on our higher education system, 
Congress acted quickly to provide the necessary funding for educational 
institutions to combat this once-in-a-century pandemic. Under President 
Trump, Congress allocated roughly $35 billion toward these efforts. 
That is 35 billion with a b.
    Republicans do not take spending taxpayers' dollars lightly, which 
is why my Republican colleagues voted against the Democrats' budget 
reconciliation bill. Unfortunately, Democrats unilaterally pushed ahead 
with their large spending bill.
    With these unprecedented levels of taxpayer money being funneled 
into educational institutions, combined with valid concerns about 
return on investment, it is imperative that Congress take a close look 
at how the Department of Education and institutions of higher learning 
spent hard-earned taxpayer dollars, and consider necessary structural 
reforms to the Higher Education Act to serve students better. I am 
disappointed that this hearing seems to have a glaring lack of actual 
and necessary oversight.
    We have a responsibility to diligently and responsibly allocate 
taxpayer dollars to those who truly need assistance. Too many in this 
Committee find it way too easy to spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars 
without promising accountability. As a Committee, our loyalty should be 
to all students, present and future.
    Any conversation surrounding postsecondary education must aim to 
reduce the cost of attendance and boost graduation rates, while also 
supporting students to pursue the type of education that works for 
them--whether it be seeking a baccalaureate degree or pursuing equally 
valuable, skills-based alternatives, such as career and technical 
education and apprenticeships, that lead to in-demand, good-paying 
jobs.
    Before the pandemic, there were over seven million unfilled jobs in 
the U.S., in part due to a skills gap. With employers in desperate need 
for qualified employees, now is the time to strengthen all learning 
opportunities that provide students with the skills and knowledge 
necessary to succeed in the work force.
    This type of strategy will not only benefit students but will boost 
our entire economy.
    Higher education is in a State of emergency, but we cannot allow 
this to turn into an excuse to nationalize the entire postsecondary 
education sector. The U.S. Constitution grants no authority over 
education to the Federal Government. Education is not mentioned in the 
Constitution of the United States, and for good reason. The Founders 
wanted most aspects of life managed by those who were closest to them, 
either by State or local government or by families, businesses, and 
other elements of civil society. Certainly, they saw no role for the 
Federal Government in education. Now, if we are going to be involved in 
education, we ought to expect a civic, financial, and productive return 
on our investment.
    Committee Republicans are focused on supporting students in 
completing an affordable postsecondary education that will prepare them 
to enter the work force with the skills they need for lifelong success.
    We ought to work together--and I mean actual collaboration--to give 
students access to education options that will prepare them to enter 
the work force with the skills they need for lifelong success. Students 
need pathways not partisanship.
    It is my hope that this hearing is a step in the productive and 
bipartisan direction. Again, thank you all for being here, and I look 
forward to discussing reforms to higher education that increase student 
success without expensive government handouts
                                 ______
                                 
    Chairwoman Wilson. Without objection, all of the Members 
who wish to insert written statements into the record may do so 
by submitting them to the Committee Clerk electronically in 
Microsoft Word format by 5:00 p.m. on March 31, 2021.
    I will now introduce the witnesses. Keith Thornton, Jr., is 
a senior at Florida International University, FIU, where he's 
majoring in recreation and sports management. Keith is a 5000 
Role Models of Excellence Project Wilson Scholar in an 
educational talent search TRIO program alum, and he is a Pell 
Grant recipient.
    During the COVID-19 pandemic Keith received emergency 
financial aid from both the CARES Act and CERTIA, which helped 
him stay afloat. I am pleased to recognize my colleague 
Representative Mark Takano to briefly introduce his constituent 
who is appearing before us as a witness today. Representative 
Mr. Takano, do I see you?
    Mr. Takano. Thank you, Chair Wilson. It's my distinct honor 
to welcome Chancellor Eloy Ortiz Oakley, who is Chancellor of 
the California Community College system. Mr. Oakley was 
appointed Chancellor for the California Community Colleges in 
2016, and is best known throughout California and the Nation 
for implementing innovative programs and policies that help 
students succeed in college.
    One of the most exciting developments in California Madam 
Chair, is the use of alternatives to testing to actually place 
students into college level classes and avoid unnecessary 
remediation. This has huge implications for diversifying----
    [Audio difficulties]
    Mr. Vassar. Chairwoman Wilson, I believe Mr. Takano's 
connection became severed possibly.
    Chairwoman Wilson. All right. So I'd like to welcome 
Chancellor Eloy Ortiz Oakley as a witness. Welcome. It's a 
pleasure to have you here today. The Chancellor was appointed 
for the California Community Colleges in 2016, and is best 
known throughout California and the Nation for implementing 
innovative programs and policies that help students succeed in 
college.
    Prior to becoming Chancellor Mr. Oakley was a 
Superintendent President of the Long Beach Community College 
District. After serving in the U.S. Army, Chancellor Oakley 
began his education at a community college, first enrolling at 
Golden West College and then transferring to the University of 
California Irvine where he received a bachelor of arts in 
environmental analysis and design and master of business 
administration. Welcome.
    Our next witness is Daniel Zibel. He is the Vice President 
and Chief Counsel and co-founder of the National Student Legal 
Defense Network. Mr. Zibel is an expert on consumer protection 
and higher education and leads Student Defense Network to 
ensure that student loan borrowers can access the courts to 
assert their rights against predatory loan servicing practices.
    Prior to joining Student Defense, Dan served as a Deputy 
Assistant General Counsel for post-secondary education at the 
Department of Education where he served as the lead legal 
counsel to the enforcement unit at Federal student aid, and on 
the Obama administration's interagency task force on foreign 
project education.
    Mr. Zibel has a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from 
Haverford College and a law degree from the University of 
Michigan Law School. Welcome.
    Next Ms. Lindsey Burke is a Director of the Center for 
Education Policy and Mark A. Kolokotrones Fellow in Education. 
Lindsey Burke oversees the Heritage Foundation's research and 
policy on issues pertaining to pre-school, K-12, and higher 
education reform.
    She also serves as a fellow with EdChoice, the Legacy 
Foundation of Milton and Rose Friedman and is on the National 
Advisory Board of Learn4Life, a network of public charter 
schools. Is on the board of the Educational Freedom Institute, 
and serves on the Board of Choice Media.
    Ms. Burke holds a bachelor's degree in politics from 
Hollins University, a master of teaching degree from the 
University of Virginia, and a Ph.D. in education policy from 
George Mason University.
    These are my instructions to you as witnesses. We 
appreciate your participation today, and we look forward to 
your testimony. Let me remind you that we have read your 
written statements, and they will appear in full in the hearing 
record. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(d) and committee practice, 
each of you is asked to limit your oral presentation to a five-
minute summary of your written statement.
    I also remind you as witnesses that pursuant to Title 18 of 
the U.S. Code, Section 1001, it is illegal--illegal, to 
knowingly and willfully falsify any statement, representation, 
writing, document, or material fact presented to Congress or 
otherwise conceal or cover up a material fact.
    Before you begin your testimony please remember to unmute 
your microphone. During your testimony staff will be keeping 
track of time, and a timer will sound when time is up. Please 
be attentive to the time. Wrap up when your time is over, and 
re mute your microphone.
    If any of you experience technical difficulties during your 
testimony, or later in the hearing, you should stay connected 
on the platform, but make sure you are muted, and use your 
phone to immediately call the IT director whose number was 
provided to you in advance.
    We will let all of the witnesses make their presentations 
before we move to Member questions. When answering a question 
please remember to unmute your microphone. I will first 
recognize my friend and son, Keith Thornton from Florida 
International University. Keith.

  STATEMENT OF KEITH THORNTON, STUDENT, FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL 
                           UNIVERSITY

    Mr. Thornton. Good afternoon everyone. Again my name is 
Keith Thornton, Junior. Chairman Member Wilson, Ranking Member 
Murphy, Members of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing me 
to testify today. I value the opportunity to come before you on 
behalf of all students across the Nation whose educations have 
been disrupted by the pandemic and who have relied on emergency 
aid to remain financially afloat and continue pursuing their 
degree.
    The fact that my experience during this challenging period 
is in many ways not unique is a testament to the severity of 
this crisis, and the ongoing need for Federal relief.
    I am a senior at Florida International University studying 
recreation and sports management. And since my freshman year, I 
have benefited from the support of fellow students, teachers, 
and positive campus environment. This support network has been 
critical to helping me remain focused and weather many of the 
challenges that have arisen in the past year.
    I am also a proud graduate of the South Florida TRIO 
Program, which enabled me to form long-lasting relationships 
with instructors and students who have been a consistent source 
of motivation. My program instructor, Ms. Tiffany Tyler, 
regularly checks in with me and checks in with my family to see 
if everything is going well with us. And there was a point in 
time where I was even contemplating whether or not college was 
for me.
    And in the end I was able to go to my peers within the 
program and they were encouraging me to continue pushing 
through and now I'm in a position where I'm getting ready to 
graduate. And Ms. Tiffany Tyler and others provided the 
guidance and mentorship that I needed to not only continue my 
education, but to also enjoy it.
    In the past year, these supportive relationships have been 
more important than ever. When the pandemic hit, my education 
was disrupted. I had to suspend my internship, and I lost my 
job. I had been working for about 2 months before the start of 
the semester, which enabled me to move into an apartment and 
forego taking out an additional loan and having to stay on 
campus.
    And losing that income was a heavy blow, so it was a great 
relief when a few weeks later I received emergency funds from 
FIU that were made available through the CARES Act. And this 
aid helped me purchase school supplies and even keep up with 
bills, whether it was rent, or anything concerning my car 
because I had to travel.
    Without that financial support, I would have been forced to 
jeopardize my future by taking out more loans that I initially 
hadn't planned for. The second round of aid that I received 
through the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental 
Appropriations Act has similarly provided a lifeline that gave 
me the opportunity to continue my studies without added 
financial stress.
    This has been critically important because even without 
having to worry about replacing the income I lost when my job 
ended, it has been challenging to remain focused on my studies. 
And although I haven't allowed myself to become discouraged, or 
to give up, COVID-19 has had a huge effect on my ability to 
stay motivated.
    I struggled with the transition of virtual learning and not 
having the same support network around me. Without the presence 
of my peers and teachers, I felt more alone and forced to rely 
on my own strength.
    Still, it has been my relationships with mentors, 
counselors, and other students that have enabled me to remain 
on track. And with their continued support, and thanks to the 
emergency financial aid I received, I look forward to 
graduating as soon as this summer.
    I would like to thank the Members of this committee for 
thinking of students across the United States who, like me, 
suddenly had to take on unexpected costs when the pandemic hit, 
and for delivering meaningful relief.
    I would also urge you to continue to provide support for 
students who are most in need. We represent the future, and I, 
like many of my counterparts, want to use our degrees to make 
an impact. Although Florida tuition rates have remained flat 
for eight years, many students would benefit from an effort 
double the Pell considering the significant financial burden 
that exists on us and our families.
    Receiving financial aid that removes some of this strain 
helps put students in a position to thrive. And as its name 
implies, FIU has an international focus, and I want to also 
speak to the importance of ensuring that international students 
have the same opportunities to succeed.
    They are pursuing the same dreams and have in many cases 
been equally impacted by the pandemic. So I want to thank you 
for the opportunity to speak here today, and I look forward to 
answering any questions you may have. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Thornton follows:]

                  Prepared Statement of Keith Thornton
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much Keith, thank you. We 
will now hear from Chancellor Eloy Ortiz Oakley. Chancellor.

    STATEMENT OF CHANCELLOR ELOY ORTIZ OAKLEY, CHANCELLOR, 
                 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES

    Mr. Oakley. Well good afternoon everyone. And Chair Wilson, 
Ranking Member Murphy, and Members of the subcommittee my name 
is Eloy Ortiz Oakley. I'm a proud community college transfer 
student, and I'm pleased to serve as the Chancellor of the 
California Community Colleges.
    I'm honored to speak to you today on the future of higher 
education, as we look to the end finally, of the COVID-19 
pandemic. My remarks will focus on how our community colleges 
are supporting our students to stay enrolled and complete their 
studies, and how an effective partnership with Congress and the 
Federal Government can lead to an equitable recovery by 
investing in higher education and supporting the displaced 
workers ravaged by this pandemic.
    First, let me tell you a little bit about the California 
Community Colleges. We are the largest and most diverse system 
of higher education in the Nation with 116 colleges serving 
more than 2 million students in urban, suburban, and rural 
communities. They are the primary pathway to educational and 
economic mobility for Californians, and we are proud to serve 
the top 100 percent of our students.
    Like much of the Nation 1 year ago today, our State went 
into an immediate lockdown to ensure the health and safety of 
our workers, families, and students. Our colleges are--I want 
first commend Governor Gavin Newsom for his swift and decisive 
action. Our colleges also acted decisively.
    In a matter of weeks our faculty and college leaders 
mobilized to convert tens of thousands of courses and programs 
to an online, or remote modality. The support of Congress has 
been critical to our system, and our students during this 
critical moment.
    The funds provided by the CARES Act were used, among other 
things to help our diverse students purchase things like 
laptops, Wi-Fi hotspots, and as emergency financial aid to 
students who lost their jobs, in many cases were struggling to 
find their next meal, or stave off eviction.
    As we look to the future of higher education, the most 
important task is to ensure that students can attend, and 
afford the total cost of college. As no doubt you have heard, 
community colleges have seen a sudden and alarming decrease in 
enrollments since the start of the pandemic.
    We believe that this is due to many factors, foremost among 
them being that our students, they balance multiple 
responsibilities. They are parents. Primary breadwinners. They 
balance multiple jobs, and they share the same Wi-Fi with a 
full household and are facing--many of them are facing 
homelessness and other challenges.
    The economic devastation brought by the COVID pandemic has 
hit our lowest income students the hardest. We are appreciative 
of the ongoing discussions about tuition free community college 
and would note that California provides nearly three billion 
dollars in student financial aid to waive tuition for low 
income students attending community colleges and four-year 
universities.
    However, the cost of college goes beyond tuition. It 
includes textbooks, supplies such as laptops, housing, food, 
transportation and child care. We have used funds from the 
stimulus legislation passed by Congress to provide direct 
emergency one-time assistance to our most vulnerable students.
    We need stable, permanent system of student financial aid 
that acknowledges the true costs of attending college. This is 
true not just in California, but across the country where the 
movement to double the Federal Pell is gaining momentum, and we 
are pleased to support this effort.
    Our commitment is two-fold--increasing financial aid for 
students to cover non-tuition related expenses, and scaling 
those additional student supports that they need to complete 
their education. Additionally, financial support is needed to 
ensure equitable broad-band access for all.
    High-speed internet is not a luxury. If anything, what we 
have learned from this pandemic is that every American 
household must have access to reliable high-speed broadband. I 
also believe the community college training programs are 
critical to preparing America's workforce, and ensuring an 
equitable recovery. California's workforce programs, including 
those funded by the Federal Perkins Career Technical Education 
Program match, employers and high-skill, high-wage industries 
with educated and qualified workers.
    We strongly encourage these programs that provide new 
pathways to secure employment and that pay a living wage. I 
believe that we should place an emphasis of community college 
programs that focus on the skills and competencies workers need 
to get back into the workforce in a meaningful way.
    We also further support oversight of the for-profit 
industry. We thank Congress for including the America Rescue 
Plan Act language that strengthens the 90/10 rule which helps 
hold for-profits accountable for their reliance on Federal aid 
dollars.
    Finally, congressional action is needed to support our 
undocumented students. This is not a partisan issue for us. 
This is a moral and economic imperative. Undocumented students 
are our future teachers, business owners, doctors and 
entrepreneurs. We urge Congress to codify the deferred action 
for childhood arrivals program.
    I will close by adding that with regard to equity higher 
education now is the time to double down on efforts to insure 
that students have the supports they need to be successful, 
whether they're in California, middle America, or the Atlantic 
Coast. I'm proud to represent a State that leads with equity at 
the center of everything we do. We cannot do this alone. 
Ongoing Federal support, a partnership with the Biden 
administration, leaders of this subcommittee and the entire 
Congress are needed to make this happen.
    I thank you for the time. I'm honored to be here today, and 
I look forward to answering your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Oakley follows:]

                Prepared statement of Eloy Ortiz Oakley
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. We will now hear from 
Lindsey Burke.

STATEMENT OF DR. LINDSEY M. BURKE, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR 
EDUCATION POLICY, AND MARK A. KOLOKOTRONES FELLOW IN EDUCATION, 
                    THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION

    Ms. Burke. Good afternoon. My name is Lindsey Burke. I am a 
Mark A. Kolokotrones Fellow in Education and the Director of 
the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation.
    Thank you Chairwoman Scott and Chairwoman Foxx and thank 
you subcommittee Chairwoman Wilson and Ranking Member Murphy 
for the opportunity to testify today.
    COVID-19 has posed challenges to every aspect of education 
in America from preschool through college. But it has also 
presented opportunities to rethink whether the current higher 
education system is serving students in the best way possible, 
and whether there are opportunities for reform.
    The congressional response to COVID-19 has now included 
three major aid packages. As part of the CARES Act passed in 
March 2020, higher education received 14 billion dollars in 
additional Federal funding on top of the sector's standard 
annual appropriations.
    That was followed by another 22.7 billion dollars in new 
funding as part of the December 2020 package. And then by the 
most recent American Rescue Plan Act which will provide yet 
another 40 billion to the higher education sector. In all, 
colleges will have received an additional 76 billion dollars in 
Federal spending over the past 12 months alone--a monumental 
sum, nearly equivalent to the Department of Education's entire 
annual discretionary budget.
    Colleges should now take the opportunity to make sure that 
that money is used responsibly. College boards of trustees and 
regents need to direct their universities to tackle program 
prioritization and reinvest funds in programs that advance 
their core mission rather than continuing to engage in a 
facilities and amenities arms race.
    From 2001 to 2011 the number of non-teaching employees and 
administrators increased 50 percent faster than teaching 
faculty. At the same time the 6-year completion rate for 
students pursuing a bachelor's degree stood at just 60 percent 
in 2020. One-third of college graduates are underemployed, 
working in jobs that do not require a bachelor's degree, and 
business leaders also report that college courses do not 
prepare graduates for the workforce, or provide them with the 
practical or technical skills needed to be successful in their 
careers.
    Schools should focus resources on teaching and learning and 
should evaluate productivity by assessing and prioritizing 
academic programs that really reinforce their core mission and 
prepare students for the workforce or further academic study. 
The colleges and universities should also review facilities and 
amenities expenditures and auxiliary services such as dining 
services and student housing, janitorial services, and consider 
outsourcing delivery and management of these functions which 
are unrelated to their core mission as academic institutions.
    And for its part Congress should not lose sight of the tens 
of billions in new relief funding now that it has been 
appropriated, and should make sure the Department of Education 
is providing timely and useful oversight of how colleges are 
spending that money.
    Congress should also rescind the elastic clause of the HEA 
prohibiting creditors from using their title for keeping 
authority to impose onerous regulations on institutions. And 
Federal policymakers should make space for private lending to 
re-emerge and for innovative education financing options to 
flourish by reducing Federal subsidies, including eliminating 
the Federal PLUS Loan program, both the parent PLUS and grad 
PLUS components.
    And finally, Federal officials should allow colleges to 
limit student borrowing. Currently, colleges are barred from 
assessing a student's likelihood of repaying a loan based on 
that student's course of study or borrowing history. Although 
these factors can predict a student's ability to repay their 
loans, colleges are not allowed to limit the amount students 
can borrow.
    Congress should amend the HEA to allow colleges to limit 
borrowing, helping students to exit school with lower levels of 
debt. Colleges and universities across the country do face 
challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, but so does 
nearly every sector of society. Ever increasing Federal 
spending and subsidies will not correct problems that have 
plagued the higher education sector for decades, and which 
predated the Coronavirus.
    Congress should take this opportunity to pursue reforms 
that will help colleges navigate the pandemic, while also 
increasing their value proposition moving forward thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Burke follows:]

                 Prepared statement of Lindsey M. Burke
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much for your testimony. 
Finally, we will hear from Daniel Zibel, welcome.

  STATEMENT OF MR. DANIEL A. ZIBEL, VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF 
        COUNSEL, NATIONAL STUDENT LEGAL DEFENSE NETWORK

    Mr. Zibel. Good afternoon Madam Chair Wilson, Ranking 
Member Murphy and Members of the committee. I am the Vice 
President and Chief Counsel of Student Defense. We use 
litigation and advocacy to bring change for students on issues 
of consumer protection and higher education.
    I want to thank you for having me here today. As we all 
know beyond the health effects and tragic losses of this past 
year, the Coronavirus has fundamentally altered so many aspects 
of American lives. With respect to higher education there have 
been enormous impacts on students, perspective students, 
families, study loan borrowers and repayment, recent graduates, 
or those who left school without a credential at all.
    COVID has exacerbated economic problems, including growing 
disparities in a system of higher education that has benefited 
so many, but has left so many others particularly in 
communities of color with long-lasting, negative effects.
    We are seeing signs now of an enrollment resurgence at for-
profit colleges. Although overall, post-secondary enrollment 
decline in the fall of 2020, enrollment at for-profit colleges 
actually increased. This trend is similar to what happened 
around the Great Recession, and is worrisome in light of the 
overwhelming evidence that students who attend for-profit 
colleges have worse outcomes at large than their peers at 
public or non-profit institutions.
    Thankfully, the U.S. Department of Education has ample 
tools to make sure that taxpayer funded student loans and 
grants are not propping up predatory institutions while leaving 
students with mountains of debt and worthless degrees. This 
spring marks the 30th anniversary of a bipartisan report by the 
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which offered 
a scathing review of the department's oversight mechanisms and 
led to bipartisan legislation that gave the department many of 
the oversight tools it has today.
    So at a time when the needs of students and borrowers are 
so pressing, the department is not effectively using the tools 
that Congress provided to ensure that colleges are best serving 
students and taxpayers. For example, on the heels of the 1991 
report, Congress sought to ensure that taxpayers were protected 
when colleges failed their students.
    Because taxpayers can be on the hook for hundreds of 
millions of dollars when an institution closes or defrauds its 
students, Congress authorized the department to recover 
financial losses, not only from institutions themselves, but 
also from the individuals who own or run those institutions, 
including board members and top executives.
    Thirty years later the department has never brought an 
action under this authority. The department has largely failed 
to fine schools for consumer facing wrongs, or issue other 
sanctions on predatory institutions. And there are far too many 
examples of the department certifying a school for years of 
access to student aid funds, even when a school is facing a 
known risk of losing State authorization or accreditation, or 
is under investigation by State and Federal law enforcement.
    Enforcement is not just about punishing misconduct. It's 
also about deterring future misconduct. But even in terms of 
routine compliance, the department's program review process and 
compliance audits are riddled with delays and inefficiencies. 
An Inspector General's sample of 739 audits over an 11 year 
period found more than 75 percent to have been conducted in a 
failing or deficient manner.
    I've noted additional failures in my written testimony. 
This is not to say that Federal student aid is always missing 
the mark. But given the enormous investment in student aid, and 
the life-long effects that failures can have on students and 
borrowers, the department must be doing a better job of 
oversight.
    I want to emphasize three additional high level 
recommendations. First, FSA must embed student protections in 
all of its decisions. Decisions should be about what is best 
for students. FSA currently considers regulated entities to be 
its partners. It's long past time for students and borrowers to 
be the true borrowers of the department.
    Second, the department must collaborate to reduce racial 
disparities around student debt. FSA should work closely with 
the department's Office for Civil Rights, and the Civil Rights 
Division of Justice, each of which has unique authorities and 
expertise.
    Third, FSA should create a public service office to oversee 
issues relating specifically to teachers, nurses and so many 
others. There should be personnel dedicated to coordinating 
with the VA on the GI bill, and with the Department of Defense 
on post-secondary programs for military members and their 
families.
    And the department must improve the bipartisan public 
service loan forgiveness program for all public servants. At 
this time, the department can and must do better. Oversight is 
one piece of a larger puzzle to ensure the promise of higher 
education. I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Zibel follows:]

                 Prepared statement of Daniel A. Zibel
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. Thank you to all of 
the witnesses, and again welcome. Under Committee Rule 9(a) we 
will now question the witnesses under the five-minute rule. I 
will be recognizing our subcommittee Members in seniority 
order, again to ensure that the Members' five-minute rule is 
adhered to, staff will be keeping track of time.
    And the timer will sound when time has expired. Please be 
attentive to the time. Wrap up when your time is over, and re-
mute your microphone.
    As chairwoman I now recognize myself for five minutes.
    This question goes to Mr. Thornton. Have you had unexpected 
emergency expenses due to the pandemic? If so, how has 
receiving emergency funding, including from the CARES Act 
helped you meet your basic needs and ensure you could continue 
in school?
    And how do you think additional investments in student aid, 
like restoring the purchasing power of the Pell Grant would 
impact future generations of students?
    Mr. Thornton. Yes. Thank you Congresswoman Wilson. So to 
answer this question I would say that you know some unexpected 
emergency expenses that have come up due to the pandemic are 
kind of what I mentioned was me, unfortunately losing my job 
last year, right before school started.
    Initially I had the job for about 2 months, and it put me 
in a position to where I was comfortable enough to be able to 
go out and you know get my own apartment. And with the job not 
needing as many employees, I was let go from that job, so it 
put me in a position to where I had to pour a lot of funds from 
my savings, and it put me in a position to where I wasn't 
really as able to provide for myself in terms of rent, bills, 
and even things concerning school, being able to purchase 
materials.
    So as far as receiving under the CARES Act, it literally 
came just in time, and I was able to use that to not only take 
care of myself as far as where I was staying, but even take 
care of myself as far as school is concerned. And I purchased 
the necessary materials in order to stay afloat and gain the 
wisdom and knowledge that I needed in order to pass my courses.
    So that was about later last year sometime, and to answer 
your question as far as additional investments in student aid. 
I think it would be awesome. I think it definitely would help 
us as students a lot, just given the current situation still 
with this pandemic, a lot of people are still losing their 
jobs.
    It's hard for people to even find jobs, and a lot of 
people, students my age, we work so that we can take care of 
ourselves as far as school is concerned. So when it comes to 
receiving additional funds and additional aid it would help a 
lot. I think it would definitely have a huge impact on us being 
able to stay in school an also be able to provide for ourselves 
concerning our school as well.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. And with programs 
like 5,000 Role Models of Excellence and the TRIO Program 
alone, how has mentoring impacted your success?
    Mr. Thornton. I would say it has greatly impacted my 
success even now. As I mentioned with a shout out to Ms. 
Tiffany Tyler who has played a huge role in me being here, in 
my first year here, she made it memorable, honestly.
    And for her to continue to remain in contact with me, 
checking with me, see how I'm doing with school, checking in on 
my GPA, making sure that I'm able to stay afloat, making sure 
that I'm applying to scholarships. She honestly helped me out 
so much. And for that I'm extremely grateful.
    And even within the 5000 Role Models of Excellence Program 
and TRIO Program, outside of mentors I was able to build 
lasting relationships with young men like myself who were a 
part of this program and who are still pursuing a degree. I 
know that Ms. Congresswoman Wilson is familiar with a fine 
young man named Preston Cooper who not only was my roommate he 
was a 5,000 Role Models Alum.
    And he's honestly been a great addition to my life and has 
helped me grow in many different ways. So the 5,000 Role Model 
in Excellence Program and TRIO Program has been tremendous and 
has helped me to get where I am now, as I mentioned to 
potentially be able to graduate by the end of this summer.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Mr. Zibel how can the 
Department of Education better protect students, especially 
those most vulnerable to abuse from predatory institutions? 
Predatory actors.
    Mr. Zibel. Sure thank you Chair Wilson. Look, under over 
the last 4 years I think what we've seen is an administration 
that eviscerated a lot of important protections for students. 
Repealing the gainful employment rule, raising the bar for 
Trump borrower defense, or you know the student loan discharges 
for defrauded students, you know, to the point where I think 
the last Congress even used the Congressional Review Act to try 
to veto what Secretary DeVos had done, stalling a worse relief 
for borrowers who had been defrauded by for-profit colleges.
    So part of it is restoring a lot of those protections, but 
that's not it. That can't be it. There has to be a cultural 
shift at the department by putting student interest first. 
Enforcement in this space can't just be about punishing actors, 
and providing debt relief after the fact. We've got to be 
deterring conduct in the first place.
    Student lives are at stake, and the ramifications of this 
are long-lasting, so we really need to be thinking about that 
first. Our organization has been writing a lot about this over 
the past six-months at 100daydocket.org about how to 
reinvigorate enforcement and really put those culture 
protections at the front end for all students and student loan 
borrowers.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. I now recognize Dr. 
Foxx for her questioning.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you Madam Chairman I appreciate that. Dr. 
Burke, well thanks to all of our witnesses today. Dr. Burke 
thank you for your testimony. Congressional Democrats are 
passionate about oversight of one particular sector of 
postsecondary education, the for-profit sector.
    The congressional Republicans care about all students at 
all institutions. What are the current institutional 
accountability metrics in the Higher Ed Act and how effective 
are they? Were these effective during the pandemic, or were 
they exposed as deficient?
    Ms. Burke. Well thank you Chairwoman Foxx for that 
question. The current accountability metrics in the Higher 
Education Act, I would say are rather lacking if we just look 
at outcomes. And that applies to all sectors. I think that it 
is inaccurate to say that problems in higher education are 
solely a function of career and technical education programs.
    If we look at traditional four-year brick and mortar 
colleges, unfortunately, we see low graduation rates across the 
board. I mentioned that the 6-year graduation rate is 60 
percent earlier, that's something that should concern us all.
    I really think that we should compare apples to apples when 
we're thinking about accountability. If you look at certificate 
programs across the country, just 45 percent of students who 
pursue a certificate at a public college had earned it with 3 
years. That figure actually rises to 70 percent for students 
who attend for-profit colleges.
    And then there are other metrics as well. Andrew Gillan who 
researches in this area found that there are 514 colleges, many 
of these are community colleges at which the loan default rates 
of their students actually exceed their graduation rates, and 
he has called these red flag institutions.
    And so you know we need accountability across the board. I 
think one way to do that is to advertise the college scorecards 
a little bit more. There's a lot of data already on that 
college scorecard. There are data about almost everything that 
you could want to know about college outcomes.
    So I think it would help greatly if we had actors in the K-
12 space like school boards, across the country making public 
schools aware of the information, making guidance counselors 
aware so they can provide that information to students. 
Sunlight really is the best disinfectant and that applies to 
accountability within the higher education system as well.
    And then of course I would argue that one of the 
accountability measures that we really need is accountability 
for taxpayer dollars because at the end of the day our taxpayer 
funds, the Federal Government originates and services 90 
percent of all student loans now.
    And a big step in the right direction, as I mentioned 
earlier, would actually be to reduce some of these Federal 
subsidies to make space for private lending to re-emerge. 
Private lenders are in a better position to judge a student's 
ability to repay those loans moving forward.
    I think that is the single best accountability measure that 
we could put into place.
    Ms. Foxx. Well thank you very much. When I heard Mr. Zibel 
say that it is inappropriate to punish actors, and we needed to 
put students first, I thought that he was talking about the 
Obama administration actually.
    Do you have an idea on how we could align the incentives of 
institutions, employers, taxpayers, and students. I think you 
mentioned about accountability, but how do we align the 
incentives so that it appears to be a win-win, instead of a 
win-lose situation all the time?
    Ms. Burke. Yes that's a great question Representative Foxx. 
I think one of the best things to do is really a State level 
effort, and we're already seeing this in 32 states across the 
country, Virginia, Tennessee, Indiana, many others, where they 
have policies in place that allocate their funds to public 
colleges based on measures that include course completion, so I 
think that's one good step in the right direction.
    And then again at the end of the day, I think we can take a 
cue from the market. We can look at what industry is doing when 
it comes to really realigning incentives. There are many 
industry upscaling programs that are out there at the moment. 
You can look at companies, Amazon, FedEx, others that will 
actually prepay tuition for programs that are aligned with 
different career paths within their organization, and so I 
think that's a way to really responsibly align incentives.
    A lot of that though is going to have to happen at the 
State level and within the private sector.
    Ms. Foxx. Great. Well you gave me a good segue to talk 
about fostering a culture of life-long learning, which we think 
is very important. But the current system is not designed for 
multiple access points and off ramps. What HEA reforms can 
Congress make to create a system where short-term programs, 
stackable credentials, and life-long learning is the new 
normal?
    Ms. Burke. Well that's such a critical question as well. 
You know there are conversations right now around allowing 
existing Title IV funds to go to shorter term programs to allow 
students to direct those dollars to options that currently 
aren't eligible under ETA rules because of those time 
limitations.
    I think that's a really good step in the right direction. 
That would enable a lot of individuals, people who want to 
switch careers, you know, mid-career to engage in earn and 
learn opportunities, to take some of those Title IV funds to 
shorter term program.
    I think that's a step in the right direction. There are 
larger reforms that need to take place like decoupling Federal 
financing from accreditation to allow Title IV dollars to flow 
in a more piecemeal way, but at least in the near-term, those 
short-term options are a good step in the right direction.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you Madam Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you, thank you. Mr. Takano of 
California. Mr. Takano are you still connected? We'll come back 
to Mr. Takano. Is Mr. Murphy on? Mr. Murphy of North Carolina, 
Mr. Murphy.
    Mr. Murphy. Thank you Chairwoman Wilson. First of all I 
want to acknowledge Keith Thornton, Mr. Thornton, just to 
congratulate you on the fine work that you've done, wish you 
the best of success. You know that success comes from within, 
and it doesn't come from being handed down to you, but it comes 
from hard work and opportunity.
    So I congratulate you on what you've done, and encourage 
you to do even greater things and we look forward to hearing 
back from you. So a question I'll direct, at least the first 
one toward Dr. Burke, and thank you for joining us today. Your 
testimony will help us as we seek to work with our Democratic 
colleagues to reform the HEA, and the best interest of students 
and taxpayer.
    I want to stress the importance of bipartisanship. Last 
year Congress came together in a bipartisan manner to pass two 
COVID-19 relief packages that included specific, and very 
significant funding for postsecondary education.
    I have to say I was disappointed that this last funding 
package went across party lines and was not a bipartisan 
effort, and that's disappointing I think, not only for the 
country, but for our Congress as whole. We need to really work 
together. The American people are better served when we tackle 
problems shoulder to shoulder.
    In that vein Dr. Burke, let me ask your assessment of what 
Congress did last year with the Higher Education Emergency 
Relief Funding. Can you put into context the size and the scope 
of the postsecondary educational bailout? You talked about 
numbers before, but I'd like you to flush that out a little bit 
more if you will.
    Ms. Burke. Sure. Thank you Representative Murphy for that 
question. I did talk about numbers before. I think it's 
important to reiterate some of those numbers. The CARES Act was 
14 billion for higher ed, and then we saw the second package in 
December. That was another 21 billion dollars in that 
supplemental proposal.
    And then again colleges and universities will receive 40 
billion as a result of this third package. So in all we're 
talking about over 70 billion dollars. As I said this is more 
than the entire Department of Education's annual discretionary 
budget, so it really is a breathtaking sum.
    I did a back of the envelope calculation this morning, and 
if you consider the fact that there are 20 million roughly, 
college students across the country, and we have now expended 
as a result of these three packages in additional Federal 
spending, 76 billion. That's over $3,800.00 per college 
student, just in these additional funds that have gone out the 
door.
    So it really is like I said, I don't think there's a better 
word to describe it than a breathtaking sum of new Federal 
spending. And of course this is not free money. This is 
taxpayer money. It gets handed down to future generations. 
Right now we have about 28 trillion dollars standing as our 
national debt, that's $84,000.00 per person in the country, and 
this will certainly add to that.
    So it's a large amount of money and it really needs some 
oversight.
    Mr. Murphy. I think we're good. That's OK. All right. Well 
thank you Dr. Burke. Let me just say you know I've been very 
concerned about administrative bloat, and I wrote a couple 
papers on that. I was on a board of trustees at a liberal arts 
college, and I saw our administrative bloat compared to the 42 
other sister colleges skyrocket.
    My fear is that Mr. Zibel would prefer we had more 
committees, more Vice Presidents, more other bureaucracy. And 
as we've seen the level, the amount of educational dollars that 
actually go toward teaching students, does pale in comparison 
to that of adding more administrative bloat.
    I fear that now that we've poured all this massive money to 
colleges, instead of actually learning to contract their 
budgets and be responsible with them, will actually do just the 
opposite. We'll see more lazy rivers. We'll see more quiet 
oasis rooms. We'll veer from the mission of colleges to teach 
students before.
    So to your point they're going to now be flush with money. 
And anybody flush with money is probably in some ways, I fear, 
because of higher education and what they've done historically 
in the last 10-15 years, they're going to spend it. And what 
does that do in all of a sudden 5-10 years when that money runs 
out, all of a sudden that is going to be demanded upon students 
and giving them much, much, much higher access or risk, or 
again being bankrupt when they have all these massive charges.
    I wish you could speak to that just a little bit about 
administrative bloat, and what this money is you think in your 
prediction, is actually going to do to college costs in the 
future.
    Ms. Burke. Sure thank you for that question. Administrative 
bloat is a huge problem. We have seen significant numbers and 
staffing increases over the past decade. I mentioned earlier 
that from 2001 to 2011 the number of non-teaching employees and 
administrators increased 50 percent faster than teaching 
faculty and colleges across the country.
    If you just look at non-instructional staff at universities 
around the country, that now accounts for more than half of 
university payroll costs, the non-instructional staff. Just 40 
percent of full-time employees at non-doctoral colleges are 
instructional staff.
    And that figure actually drops to 28 percent at doctoral 
granting institutions. So just 28 percent at those institutions 
are teaching faculty. This is something that higher education 
scholar Preston Cooper has looked into at length, and he has a 
new report he just put out that I would commend where he 
recently found that since 2003 only one-third of the increase 
in colleges and universities core expenditures has gone to 
spending on instruction, just one-third of the increase goes to 
instruction.
    As he says almost all of the rest has fed the growth of the 
vast administrative apparatus of these institutions. And so as 
I mentioned in my opening statement, colleges really have 
needed a course correction for decades, and so you know, I 
think too many unfortunately are now looking at these various 
stimulus bills as a way to pay for general fiscal mal-
administration over the past two decades.
    Mr. Murphy. Dr. Burke thank you. We're passed our time. I 
appreciate it. Thank you Madam Chairman, I'll yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you Mr. Murphy. Ms. Burke you are 
consistently going over time. Please be mindful of the clock. 
It's there for you. You seem not to hear me when I'm telling 
you that you're over time, so you will have to keep up with the 
time, and when you see that your time is up please stop. We 
have a long hearing and a lot of people to ask questions. Thank 
you.
    Mr. Takano of California is our next person, speaker.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you Madam Chair. My question is for 
Chancellor Oakley. Chancellor could you comment briefly on how 
California deals with the balance between the administrative 
costs and instructional costs?
    Mr. Oakley. Absolutely. And it's a pleasure to be here 
again answering these questions. First of all in California you 
know each State is different. But in California in the 
community colleges, we actually have a law. It's called the 50 
Percent Law, which requires every community college to assign 
at least 50 percent of all revenues that come from the State to 
instruction, to the classroom.
    Now because the nature of instruction has changed quite a 
bit over time, we have had to expand that view because there 
are a number of other efforts that go into supporting a 
student, including a lot of the student supports that help a 
student succeed. So that is the way we handle it, and I would 
also say that because our system is comprised of 73 districts, 
all have locally elected boards, as well as a State system 
which has a board of Governors.
    There is a sunlight all over our system. So these questions 
are constantly addressed. They're constantly examined, and 
we're constantly being held accountable for where our dollars 
go.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you Chancellor. You know this hearing is 
in relationship to the American Rescue Plan and how it relates 
to education. I know that in California your sister 
institutions, the California State University System, and the 
UC system, have suspended the use of standardized tests for the 
purposes of admission.
    Do you expect that--it's not really an experiment, it was 
sort of forced by circumstances. Do you expect these sorts of 
things, these sorts of practices to continue after the pandemic 
is over?
    Mr. Oakley. I do. In the California community colleges 
we've eliminated the use of standardized placement exams. We 
have found through our own research, as well as research that's 
happened across the country, that the use of standardized exams 
for the purpose of placing the students in courses has 
significantly undermined low-income students from all 
backgrounds.
    The same is true for standardized admissions exams. And I 
think the research is overwhelming now. I think places like the 
University of California have seen the impact that it has had 
on low-income students and communities of color. And I don't 
believe that we are going back to those practices in the 
future.
    Mr. Takano. Is it not true that this innovation, this 
experimentation of not using tests like the placement, or to 
place students into college level classes at California 
community colleges. But that was going on pre-pandemic is what 
I understand, and can you tell us about what you've seen? Is 
your faculty happy with this? Have the outcomes been good? Have 
your transfer rates suffered because of the fact that you're 
placing students by using instruments other than standardized 
tests?
    Mr. Oakley. So first of all the use of what we call 
multiple measures placement. That is using multiple sources of 
information to gain information about a student, and place them 
in the course that they deserve to be in, and particularly in 
math and English, has been going on for several years in 
certain pilots across the system.
    A couple of years ago this became law for the entire 
system. Since then students who have been placed using this 
method, without using standardized placement exams, students 
are succeeding in numbers equal to those students that may have 
begun in remedial courses before then.
    We have seen significant, significant increases in the 
number of students of color that have been placed in transfer 
level English and math, and they are succeeding at the same 
rates as other students. So we have seen nothing but success 
thus far. It's given us a lot of good information about how we 
continue to roll this system out.
    And as we continue to rely less and less on remedial 
courses, and rely more and more on providing students a pathway 
to getting into courses that actually count toward their 
educational goal. And that's been the biggest change. So many 
courses were created in remedial education before this change 
that were leading nowhere.
    And so many students, particularly those of low income 
status were getting trapped in these courses and not being able 
to complete their educational goal.
    Mr. Takano. Thank you Chancellor my time is up. It sounds 
like innovation was already happening in California community 
colleges, and it sounds like diversifying the higher education 
is also being significantly impacted. Madam Chair I yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. We'll now here from 
Mr. Grothman from Wisconsin.
    Mr. Grothman. Yes. Thanks for having me. I have a question 
here for Dr. Burke. You know over the weekend I ran into 
another woman, age 51. She got laid off. She had a general 
degree, had a good job, and now she can't find anything. And 
she was just bemoaning the fact that when she was you know, 
rather than go to a four-year college, why she wasn't a welder, 
a medical tech of some nature, something or other.
    And I still hear back home well-paid guidance counselors 
advising everybody to go to college when again and again, I 
find people not going to college lined up higher paid with less 
student debt, and more job security. What can we do to 
straighten out these reasonably well-paid guidance counselors 
to give people a little bit better advice, not to mention, on 
the other end of the thing.
    When I talked to our employers in construction, in medical 
field, and manufacturing. Well right now the only thing holding 
us back from building more housing in Wisconsin, we can't find 
anybody to do the work. What can we do to straighten out these 
guidance counselors there Dr. Burke? It's a lot of people's 
lives.
    Ms. Burke. Thank you Representative Grothman. I completely 
agree with you that we need to be communicating to students 
that there are multiple pathways to climbing the ladder of 
upward, economic mobility in America. And too often, the only 
answer that we give them when asked what they should do, is 
attend a traditional four-year college.
    And that has not served many students well who would be 
better situated in the future if they did something other than 
go through that four-year brick and mortar route. And you know 
to your point about construction workers and mechanics, 
electricians, waitresses, you know, all of these individuals 
end up bearing the cost of Federal bailouts, and ever-
increasing Federal subsidies in the higher education sector.
    I think it's always important to bear in mind that still 
today two-thirds of Americans do not hold bachelors degrees, 
and it is that two-thirds of Americans who also have to pick-up 
the cost for ever-increasing Federal spending.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. I'll give you a general question. You 
know again I hear talking to my trade unions or tech schools 
and people, you know, going back, getting a skill, maybe in 
their early 30's, after they already got a college degree in 
their early 20's.
    Percentage-wise Doctor Burke, I have no idea what 
percentage of people going to a four-year college would be 
better off not going to one today in your opinion.
    Ms. Burke. Well it's hard to say, and it depends on how you 
quantify better off. You know even an individual who might not 
see a massive increase in earnings after having graduated, 
might still say that the experience was worthwhile for them.
    People go to college for a lot of different reasons. But 
one thing we do know is there are an awful lot of students who 
leave without earning that paper credential that they had so 
fought to get. So many students right now are leaving without 
graduating, and I mentioned 60 percent, 6 year college 
graduation rate. And really the worst position you can be in is 
having gone to two or three or three and a half years of 
undergrad work, taken out those loans and not graduated with 
that paper credential.
    And unfortunately, we do see that in many cases. So I think 
that for those individuals you could make the case that another 
path would have been much more worthwhile, but it is hard to 
quantify.
    Mr. Grothman. Well, OK I know there's certain authors who 
take a stab at it, but I'm going to come back to the woman I 
talked to over the weekend. You know I frequently make the 
pitch for young people to get a skill, rather than college, and 
that you're going to graduate with less debt, and frequently 
make more money immediately.
    One thing I don't think is taken into account is if you do 
wind up with some middle low management thing, and you're laid 
off when you're 50 or 55, in our society frequently you're 
almost unemployable. Whereas if you have a skill, you can keep 
working until you're 60 or 70 or 80 if you want to. Could you 
comment on the benefit of having a skill, a specific skill set 
in manufacturing, med, tech, whatever, as opposed to a general 
degree on people who get laid off when they're over 40?
    Ms. Burke. Sure. Well what we do know, and I can't give you 
specific numbers on the skill-based side. But what we do know 
is that there are a large proportion of students who are 
leaving undergraduate work, and entering jobs that do not 
require a college degree. And so this high level of what we 
refer to as underemployment is a real problem.
    And I think does suggest that many of those students would 
have been better served pursuing options that are skills-based 
in nature.
    Mr. Grothman. Well thank you Dr. Burke. I appreciate what 
you're saying, and I hope you continue to educate young people 
around the country to get a second opinion from their guidance 
counselors, who are frequently well-paid and giving bad advice 
for their pay. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. Ms. 
Jayapal from Washington I see you driving, welcome.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you Madam Chair. I am not driving I 
promise you, but I am in a car because I didn't want to miss 
this very important hearing. It is clear that the pandemic has 
had a negative impact on college enrollment for all students, 
particularly low-income, first generation, and certainly 
freshman of color, who we've seen a nearly 30 percent decline 
in community college enrollment across the country.
    And since a degree, a higher education degree, whether it's 
skills training, or a four year college, remains a strong 
pathway to the middle class our economic recovery may be 
largely dependent on affordable access to postsecondary 
education. And that's why I'm excited for the Seattle Promise 
Program in my district, and proposals like My College for All 
Act which President Biden has embraced, to make both four-year 
and two year public higher education free for families earning 
up to $125,000.00.
    Mr. Thornton it's very clear from your testimony that 
Federal programs like TRIO have been meaningful to you 
personally, and in your student career, in spite of programs 
that help some students shoulder the cost of textbooks, 
housing, food, and childcare, data still shows that due to 
COVID-19 as many as 56 percent of students will need additional 
aid to stay enrolled.
    Is it your opinion that more comprehensive Federal 
assistance would help students to stay in school?
    Mr. Thornton. Yes. Thank you so much for asking, and I 
definitely agree that additional funding would help students be 
able to stay in school. I think kind of being a living 
testimony to the current situation with the pandemic, me plus a 
bunch of other students like myself, some people we literally 
worked, some students we worked to actually stay in school to 
pay tuition, to pay to afford books and school materials.
    And I think that additional funding definitely would assist 
in the students being able to stay in school, and pursue their 
dreams, or their dream job, or pursue a career with their 
major.
    Ms. Jayapal. So important. Thank you so much. Considering 
Pell has gone from covering 80 percent of the [audio issues] to 
less than 30 percent at a public four-year college, would you 
speak more on this disparity making college increasingly out of 
reach for too many people?
    Mr. Vassar. I think the beginning of your question was not 
heard Congresswoman Jayapal.
    Ms. Jayapal. Oh OK, thank you. This is a question for 
Chancellor Oakley. Non-tuition costs are an important 
consideration since Pell has gone from covering 80 percent of 
expenses to less than 30 percent at a public four-year college. 
Would you speak more on this disparity making college 
increasingly out of reach for too many people?
    Mr. Oakley. Absolutely and thank you for that question 
Representative Jayapal. This is particularly an acute situation 
in states like California. High cost of living states, high 
cost of living communities. Our students, particularly those 
who attend California community colleges and those who attend 
broad access public institutions come from some of the lowest 
income communities in California and throughout the country.
    So the cost of attending college is the most significant 
cost. States like California for example, the California 
community colleges has the lowest tuition in the country. In 
addition, more than half of our students don't pay tuition 
because of the California College Promise.
    So the cost of attending college, the true cost of 
attending college is the issue that keeps so many students from 
one, attending college, and two, attending full-time because so 
many of them have to juggle multiple issues, have to maintain 
work in order to provide for their families and for their own 
education.
    So Pell is a significant component to helping those 
individuals afford to go to college, to complete their college 
education in a four-year period of time. And it has not been 
keeping up with the cost of attending college.
    And so supporting an increase in Pell is certainly 
something that we support, as well as continuing to reduce the 
cost of attendance is also a key ingredient.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you so much. And my College For All bill 
would double Pell, and it would allow states with tuition 
programs to redirect any of their savings toward making college 
more accessible. How would--my College for All bill also uses a 
Federal/State partnership to make public four-year universities 
free for qualifying students.
    Chancellor, how would having a Federal partnership that 
allows states to redirect savings to non-tuition costs help 
colleges nationally as they struggle with low enrollment?
    Mr. Oakley. Well I believe this Federal/State partnership 
is critical. States are in the primary role of providing 
support for our colleges and universities and they're doing--
states like California are doing a remarkable job of providing 
the additional support, lowering tuition, keeping tuition low, 
keeping the cost of college low.
    So this partnership would be beneficial in that states like 
California could use those additional resources to provide 
additional support for students, either support services or 
support for non-tuition related costs.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you so much. And this is a key important 
piece, and I look forward to working with you. Madam Chair I 
yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. According 
to my records Mr. Good of Virginia is the next questioner. Mr. 
Good you're on.
    Mr. Good. Thank you Madam Chairman, and thank you to all of 
our witnesses for being with us today. My questions will be 
directed specifically to Dr. Burke. Dr. Burke I wanted to ask 
you how do you think Federal funding has contributed to the 
exploding costs of higher education?
    Ms. Burke. Well thank you for that question Representative 
Good. It has clearly contributed. If you look at the inflation 
adjusted tuition rates since the 1970's. Those have quintupled 
at both public and private colleges across the country. And 
then when you compare that number to Federal subsidies, and 
those subsidies over the same time period have really increased 
dramatically with spending on student loans rising 328 percent 
over the last 30 years, from about 20 billion in 1990 to about 
87.5 billion in the most recent year of data available.
    So, and I would also say that this question of 
disinvestment and State spending is I think, also a little bit 
off the mark. Because if you look at appropriations for public 
colleges and universities at the State level, those have 
increased $1,700.00 per pupil in real terms since 1980.
    So it is safe to say, I would agree with Economist Richard 
Vetter at the University of Ohio that dumping Federal subsidies 
out of helicopters as he once put it, has only enabled 
universities to increase their costs, their spending 
profligately, and really pass that on to students.
    Mr. Good. I've had students tell me, and parents tell me 
that once they get on the student loan treadmill it just 
continues. In other words they get loans, it's almost you have 
to work deliberately to stop the student loans from coming. 
Once you enroll that first semester that first year, it seems 
automatic.
    In your testimony you talked about requiring university's 
report on the use of Federal funding. What specific questions 
might you ask them to report on?
    Ms. Burke. Sure. And I think specifically with regard to 
the new money that has gone out the door, we really need to 
know whether colleges are using these funds to actually help 
students who are struggling. There's statutory requirements. 
About 50/50 of those dollars going to student-based aid, and 
then the other 50 percent going to institutional priorities, 
but we really do need to take a look and encourage colleges, 
and the Department of Ed to assess if they're sending that 
money to students who are financially struggling.
    And then second I would say, we should assess if they're 
actually using those funds to build out their IT and distance 
learning capacities to navigate any sort of similar existential 
threat in the future that they might face like another 
pandemic.
    Mr. Good. You've done a great job of verbalizing what most 
of us have already seen in the way that college education costs 
are just going through the roof, far outpacing inflation, 
multiple times over.
    Besides addressing funding, what policies do you think 
Congress could do that could help enact the amount of the non-
classroom, non-education expenses specifically, the more what 
many might think are wasteful or exorbitant, or excessive, 
whether it's staff, or whether it's activities that are being 
funded.
    What role do you think Congress could play. How could 
Congress help address the amount of spending that's going to 
administrative type and other, maybe what some people might 
think, excessive and wasteful spending?
    Ms. Burke. Well I think the single best thing Congress 
could do would be eliminate the Plus Loan program. The Grad 
Plus Loan program in particular, this allowed graduate students 
to borrow up to the cost of attendance, and then the Parent 
Plus program allows parents to borrow for their undergrad 
student's college experience.
    And that really encourages, a family level of debt, and 
family level borrowing for families. So eliminating the Plus 
Loan program would be the No. 1 step to take. And as I 
mentioned earlier, actually allowing colleges themselves to 
limit the amount of money that students borrow.
    Mr. Good. It seems we have systemic issues where there's 
not a partnership between parents, families if you will, of 
students and the institutions, and trying to together work to 
make college affordable without putting people of course into 
excessive debt.
    What might be included? What role might Congress play to 
help improve competition in such that like a career in 
education, a technical education, temporary programs, 
vocational programs, community college, and other workforce 
development pathways might be able to get on equal footing with 
the traditional four-year school.
    Ms. Burke. Yes thanks. Again, I think one of the best 
options there would actually be reforming accreditation, 
decoupling Federal financing from accreditation to allow new 
quality assurance mechanisms to pop up, to allow a State to for 
instance, enable the Mayo Clinic to credential a nursing 
course, or the State of Virginia to allow Mount Vernon to 
credential a history course.
    And then enable Title IV funds to actually follow students 
to those individually credentialled courses and courses of 
study. And again, couple that with those short-term options for 
Title IV funding that would allow individuals to go find the 
skills and competencies they need immediately without going 
through a four-year brick and mortar college, would be a second 
extremely important step in that direction.
    Mr. Good. I think I've about expired my time. I thank you 
very much for answering my questions, and again appreciate you 
and all the other witnesses being with us today. I yield back 
my time Chairman.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. Ms. Leger Fernandez 
of New Mexico welcome.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Hello. Thank you so much Chair Wilson. 
And thank you to the witnesses for joining us today. Mr. Zibel, 
we've heard misrepresentations about your testimony. Would you 
like to respond quickly?
    Mr. Zibel. Thank you Congresswoman. You know I think there 
were two comments. One from Ranking Member Foxx. I guess to put 
it bluntly, I don't think I said anything about punishment not 
being important. I think it is an important aspect of deterring 
misconduct.
    And when there is an institution of higher education, and 
we've seen this for decades. I really would encourage the 
Members to go back and look at the bipartisan report that 
Senator Sam Nunn and his committee drafted, back in the early 
nineties.
    And it really is deja vu all over again for some of what 
we've been seeing. And you know this is about protecting 
students at the front end. This is about making sure that 
students aren't saddled with debt, that they will never repay 
because of worthless degrees. This is about making sure that 
individuals are getting the economic opportunity through 
education to better their lives, and to ensure that the 
taxpayer investment in this, through grants and loans is being 
well spent.
    So you know it's not about partisan politics. I think if 
you look back at the history of this, Secretary Bennett, the 
Education Secretary under President Reagan was a fierce critic 
of the for-profit education industry, and for good reason at 
that time. And you know, history has a tendency to repeat 
itself, and you know, that's what the Department of Education 
needs to be doing, is really making sure that that does not 
happen again.
    It does not happen to saddle yet another generation of 
students with these mountains of debts that will never be 
repaid.
     Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you for that clarification, and 
also making sure that we all focus. Our focus should be, 
indeed, on the students. And in thinking about the focus on the 
students I am, like the chair and others who have testified 
today, concerned about the non-tuition costs of college, and 
that the pandemic has simply worsened food insecurity, and that 
that's something that the Rescue Act can address with the 
emergency funding.
    Miss Chairwoman, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the 
record an article from the Santa Fe Reporter entitled, ``New 
Mexico College Students Face Food Insecurity.''
    Chairwoman Wilson. So ordered.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. I'm also concerned about declines in 
student enrollment. And students of color in particular, right, 
have seen steep enrollment declines during the pandemic. In New 
Mexico, as an example, we've seen about a 10 percent decline 
from fall 2019 to fall 2020.
    We are also in New Mexico, facing the need to diversify our 
energy sector and move to a green economy, and will really need 
those partnerships without our higher education schools to lead 
in training for this just renewable innovative economy, like I 
like to say, in New Mexico.
    In Santa Fe Community College we just partnered with our 
National Labs and the renewable energy sector connecting 
schools and employers. Chancellor Ortiz Oakley, what do you 
believe are the best practices to recover student enrollment, 
and especially addressing those programs which could develop 
the workforce for new economies like the green economy?
    Mr. Oakley. Thank you for that question Congresswoman. 
First and foremost, I strongly believe that community colleges 
are the greatest answer to a recovery with equity in America. 
They are closest to the students that we're talking about. They 
open their arms to every student, whether recently displaced 
worker, or a recent graduate from a high school.
    And community college is college, so they are preparing 
students for success in 21st Century economy. So first of all, 
I believe one of the greatest impacts on our students has been 
the economic fallout, the health effects from the pandemic. Our 
communities of color and low-income communities have been hit 
the hardest. So for them it is an economic issue, so providing 
direct, emergency support of any kind possible, is one of the 
best antidotes to helping them be able to make the choice 
between paying rent, and paying for their tuition and books, so 
that they can continue their education.
    Second, it's addressing the needs of displaced workers. So 
many working adults were already struggling post the last 
recession. This pandemic, the economic fallout, has devastated 
their opportunity to be in the economy in a meaningful way. So 
supporting short-term, career-training programs, to help get 
the support, the skills and competencies that workers need 
today, I think is critically important to a recovery with 
equity.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you very much Chancellor, I 
yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Ms. Miller-Meeks of Iowa 
you're next. You're now live.
    Ms. Miller-Meeks. Thank you so much. I appreciate it Madam 
Chair. Thank you for holding this subcommittee hearing, and for 
providing for the witness testimonies. Thank all of you for 
testifying today. So I'm a little unusual. I'm one of eight 
kids. When I was burned at 15, decided to become a doctor. And 
so I left home at 16.
    I actually enrolled in San Antonio Junior College as it was 
called at that time, then was able to get a degree in nursing, 
a master's in education and ultimately a medical degree. So I 
fully support what you've said about community colleges and a 
pathway for education, especially for minority, for women, for 
under-represented groups of low-income, but actually for any 
student who wishes to go onto college, especially if they're 
concerned and aren't quite sure what they want to major in, or 
what will be a successful career path for them.
    Having said that I was able to work, go to school and have 
a combination of loans. And so my question for Dr. Burke is 
that there appears to be a dramatic rise in the number of loans 
borrowed for graduate level programs, and often these graduate 
level programs lead to high-paying jobs.
    And I'm concerned about the combination of unlimited 
Federal lending, and unlimited loan forgiveness for these 
individuals who may ultimately result in a higher income career 
pathway. So can you briefly explain in you're concerned about 
this, and you know what can Congress do to create a responsible 
lending program, and how can these reforms lead to lowered 
college cost for students?
    Ms. Burke. Great thank you Representative Miller-Meeks. I 
appreciate that. It is, it's a major concern I think for many 
of us. The proposals that are out there right now to forgive 
student loan debt anywhere from $10,000.00 to $50,000.00 and 
student loan debt, depending on what proposal you look at, are 
incredibly regressive in nature.
    They would really shift the burden of paying for college 
away from those individuals who do in fact directly benefit 
from their education onto, as I mentioned, the two-thirds of 
Americans who don't have bachelors degrees, and would 
presumably not earn as much down the road on average, as their 
college-going counterparts.
    And you also bring up a really important point, which is 
the point about professional degrees and borrowing. We know 
that individuals who pursue professional degrees in particular, 
on average, do quite well. Doctors, lawyers, and so the idea 
that we would forgive those student loans among those 
individuals who statistically speaking are likely to earn a 
decent living moving forward, really, as I said earlier, is 
regressive.
    And so I think to get back to my earlier point, if we want 
to drive down costs, we need to tackle the Plus Loan program. 
The private lending market will meet the needs of students who 
are pursuing professional degrees, knowing full well that their 
ability to repay those loans will be very high in the future.
    Ms. Miller-Meeks. Thank you for that. And in Iowa we have 
concurrent enrollment for high school and for community 
colleges as pathways to success. We also have the Iowa Student 
Loan program, and you had mentioned about private lending and 
Federal lending.
    We're very concerned. They do a great job of mentoring 
students, advising them, looking at if they're a certain 
educational pathway, how that will result in income and ability 
to pay back loans. And I'm concerned about, you know, doing 
away with an institution such as the Iowa Student Loan program 
which does a great job of preparing students and also giving 
financial literacy.
    So if students want to find good jobs after college, and 
that could mean that it leads to a baccalaureate, but it could 
be a different career pathway. And there is a discrepancy 
between what students feel like they know what employers say 
about their job readiness, and I just was going to ask if there 
are some non-traditional education pathways that students 
should be exploring, Dr. Burke.
    Ms. Burke. Thank you. There certainly are a lot of really 
innovative non-traditional pathways that are out there, and I 
think interest is growing in these pathways, because we know 
that employers, as I mentioned earlier, are reporting that 
students who attend the traditional four-year route, aren't 
often prepared.
    There was a survey that came out in 2018 from the National 
Association of Colleges and Employers that found that although 
almost 80 percent of students believe they're proficient in 
oral and written communication, just 42 percent of employers 
agreed.
    And then that survey was followed-up by a subsequent survey 
from the Association of American Colleges and Universities that 
found that similarly, while 62 percent of students felt they 
were competent in these skills, just 28 percent of employers 
agreed. So this gap in skills was eluded to earlier, does have 
negative economic impacts.
    It's left more than six million jobs empty across the 
country, so I think all of that calls into question the value 
add for a lot of institutions.
    Ms. Miller-Meeks. Thank you Madam Chair. I yield back my 
time.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you, thank you. And now our good 
friend Mr. Jones of New York. Welcome to the committee, 
welcome.
    Mr. Jones. Thank you so much for your leadership Madam 
Chair. And thank you to all of the witnesses for appearing 
before us today. On behalf of the American people I want to 
thank Chancellor Oakley for your innovative work to address the 
challenges faced by community college students during the 
pandemic.
    Mr. Zibel, for your work to hold the bad actors in our 
higher education system accountable, and of course Mr. Thornton 
for sharing your important first-hand experiences as a student 
during these hard times. While the ongoing pandemic has put a 
strain on colleges and universities, we can all agree that the 
core problems in U.S. higher education predate the COVID-19 
pandemic.
    Wages have been stagnant for literally decades when you 
adjust for inflation, even as the cost of a four-year college 
education has soared. The average debt of someone graduating 
from a four-year college or university today is four times 
higher than it was in the early nineties, and this burden is 
not shared equally.
    Women, people of color, and members of the LGBTQ community 
hold a disproportionate amount of student debt, and find 
themselves less likely to graduate with a four-year degree. In 
my district, in Westchester and Rockland Counties in New York, 
where the cost of living is sky-high, thousands of young people 
must live at home with their parents in part, due to the 
student debt that they shoulder.
    This delays, or outright forecloses their home ownership, 
which we know to be the single greatest generator of wealth in 
America. So I look forward to working with my colleagues to 
address these issues, and want to thank them for their work to 
make college accessible, affordable, and equitable for all.
    Before turning to my questions, I do want to set the record 
straight on the idea that increases in financial aid somehow 
lead to increases in tuition. That is simply not true. First of 
all no study on the so-called Bennett hypothesis has been able 
to find convincing evidence that this hypothesis is real, at 
least at public institutions.
    However, a rigorous study found that for-profit 
institutions eligible for Federal student aid, charged 78 
percent more than comparable programs at ineligible, for-profit 
institutions. This strongly suggests that we need better 
oversight of the for-profit sector, not that we should stop 
providing students with Federal aid to enroll in college.
    Mr. Zibel, I'd like to begin with you. As you stated in an 
interview last year, there are many problems for the government 
to address in this country right now, and the Department of 
Education doesn't have to wait for Congress to act when it 
comes to providing student debt relief.
    I've been a leader on this issue in the Congress. Indeed 
Congress has already given the Department of Education clear 
statutory authority to forgive Federally owned student debt 
under the Higher Education Act. So Mr. Zibel would you agree 
that under existing law, yes or no, the President or his 
education secretary has the ability to forgive federally-owned 
student loan debt with a stroke of a pen.
    Mr. Zibel. So thank you Congressman for your question, and 
I appreciate your earlier commentary leading up to it. This is 
an important topic, and something that I understand that the 
White House and the department are taking a very, very close 
look at. You know quite frankly it is not something I have ever 
taken the kind of legal dive that I think needs to be taken.
    And I really want to defer to the experts who have taken 
the dive on that one before, commenting in front of Congress 
today. But I think what's immediately clear is that there are 
buckets of student loan borrowers for whom that immediate 100 
percent loan relief is doable right now. These are the 400,000 
borrowers who government has already determined are eligible 
for total and permanent disability discharges.
    These are the borrowers that the department has already 
found victimized by predatory for-profit colleges. These are 
borrowers who are attending schools that closed. And government 
needs to be taking those steps right now today, to discharge 
100 percent of those loans.
    Mr. Jones. Yes. Mr. Zibel I appreciate that, reclaiming my 
time, and actually I agree with you, and I would like to enter 
it back into the record a paper you co-authored in October 2020 
on this very issue of for-profit colleges, personally causing 
financial losses to students and taxpayers because of their 
misconduct. Madam Chair I'd like to enter that into the record.
    Chairwoman Wilson. So ordered.
    Mr. Jones. And I would just to put a finer point on this, I 
understand that you don't consider yourself an expert on this 
subject, but Mr. Zibel you would at least agree that the 
Department of Education has already used its statutory 
authority to pause the collection of student debt, and indeed 
the accrual of interest, which is obviously a form of student 
debt cancellation, yes or no?
    Mr. Zibel. Yes. I mean quite----
    Mr. Jones. Thank you. Reclaiming my time. Thank you so 
much. And finally, as we close, as concerns about the spread of 
COVID-19 increase, so did reported incidents of bullying, 
racism, and xenophobia toward the Asian, Asian American, and 
Asian Pacific Islander, or AAPI communities on college campuses 
across the country.
    Consequently, individuals from these communities reportedly 
afraid to engage on basic day to day tasks, like going to the 
grocery store, or walking alone in their neighborhoods. 
Chancellor Oakley, what can colleges and universities do to 
ensure that AAPI students feel safe and valued in their classes 
and on campuses?
    Mr. Oakley. Thank you for that question Congressman. First 
of all to be very clear, all colleges and universities should 
immediately and clearly repudiate any attacks on the Asian 
American or Pacific Islander community. We need to engage 
directly with our students, our faculty and our staff to 
discuss these issues, to ensure that we remove the stigma that 
has been applied to Asian American communities around the 
COVID-19 pandemic, or anything else.
    So we should treat this issue like we would any other 
racial reckoning issue and take it on head-on. We have a direct 
role in that, and we have our classrooms and our colleges, and 
our microphone to be able to weigh in on this.
    Mr. Jones. Thank you sir. Madam Chair I yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. Let me be mindful to 
the witnesses. There's a time limit. And when you see stop I 
will give you the opportunity to finish your thought, but not a 
whole minute. Some of these issues are so important we need to 
address them, but we have to be fair. Thank you so much. And 
now Mrs. McClain of Michigan you're now live Mrs. McClain.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you so much Madam Chair. I appreciate 
the opportunity to be on this committee, and I appreciate 
everyone on the committee as well as all the witnesses. My 
question is really regarding oversight and directed to Dr. 
Burke.
    You suggest Congress keep a watch on the tens of billions 
of dollars colleagues are spending in emergency relief. What 
exactly are some categories of expenses you are most interested 
in, and what indicators should Congress pay attention to that 
show it used taxpayers money responsibly?
    Ms. Burke. Thank you for that question Representative 
McClain. So as I eluded to earlier, there are statutory 
allowances for these additional funds, and then there are the I 
think recommendations for what colleges should be using these 
funds for.
    So for example, the public and non-profit schools can use 
the money in these emergency higher education reform dollars 
for financial aid to students, and then they can use about half 
for institutional revenue, so that can be anything from faculty 
and staff training, it can be payroll costs, it can be 
backfilling lost revenue, it can be backfilling lost revenue 
due to a lack of sporting events, so it really runs the gamut.
    So those are indeed allowable uses of these funds. At the 
university level though, I think what they really should be 
using these funds for is to support struggling students. And as 
I said earlier, build out their IT infrastructures so that they 
can navigate these challenges in the future.
    And so I think that's the role of oversight at the 
Department of Ed, is to really look at what they're doing. They 
do have to submit reports, universities do regularly on how 
they're spending these funds. I hope the department makes those 
reports as public as possible.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. I yield back my time. Thank you 
very much.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. We'll now hear from Ms. 
Manning of North Carolina.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you Madam Chair, and thank you to all 
the witnesses for being with us today. My first question is to 
Chancellor Oakley. I have two terrific community colleges in my 
district. I visited them when I was in district last to see the 
incredible things they're doing, and how they're holding up 
during his pandemic.
    They're doing all they can to support their students, but 
they have seen enrollment decline. How have you handled the 
tuition, the reduce tuition revenue from declining enrollment 
if your community colleges had to take cost-cutting measures? 
And if so, what kinds of things are they doing?
    Mr. Oakley. Thank you for that question Representative 
Manning. And North Carolina has amazing community colleges. 
First of all, the pandemic has had a direct impact on the 
revenue and expenses that community colleges have had to incur.
    One, as you mentioned, there has been a decline in 
enrollment. This means a decline in student fees, tuition, 
other revenue that colleges collect, as well as the increased 
cost to going remote or online almost overnight, providing the 
training to support the faculty, and the direct support to 
students.
    So what we've done is work first and foremost with a State, 
the legislature and the Governor, to make sure that they are 
aware of those costs, and make sure they are aware of those 
revenue declines.
    Fortunately, Governor Newsom and the legislature provided 
direct support for our colleges and universities, and we've 
also been working with Congress. We're very appreciative of the 
aid that you've provided us. I do agree that that aid needs to 
go to support students, and support the classrooms, so that we 
can become more resilient.
    And I think by and large, community colleges across the 
Nation have done exactly that. They have been on the front 
lines. They did an amazing job of on a dime, transitioning to 
remote learning, and that remote learning has had a cost. And 
so we need to continue to support community colleges like yours 
in North Carolina, because they do the yeoman's work in 
supporting those who have been hit hardest by the pandemic.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you. And as hope is on the horizon and 
we look toward the post-pandemic world, what steps do you think 
community colleges can take to reverse those enrollment 
declines?
    Mr. Oakley. Well I think given the resources that have been 
made available, community colleges need to be reaching out 
directly to their communities, directly to their students, 
trying to understand what their needs are, ensuring that 
emergency aid goes directly to them, and working with 
employers, and community members to provide them the jobs that 
they need, the hours that they need in order to make ends meet, 
so that they can continue their education.
    So I think that is the beauty of community colleges, they 
are in communities, they work with community members, mayors, 
employers, that has to be done on steroids in order for us to 
reach those students.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you. Let me ask you about another area. 
I am a former immigration attorney, and the plight of 
undocumented students is one that is of great concern to me. 
And I believe we need to find a pathway to citizenship for our 
DACA students, as well as a pathway to success for all of our 
future workers.
    Is this something that you believe we need to address, and 
do you have any comments on what we can be doing to address 
this?
    Mr. Oakley. We absolutely need to address this. California 
community colleges have over 70,000 DACA students, the largest 
of any State in the country. These are individuals that serve 
their communities. They work in their communities. They do 
everything possible to support their communities, so we need to 
provide them the support that they need to come out of the 
shadows, get the education that they need, and contribute 
meaningfully to the economy, and to support their families.
    So absolutely, we would implore Congress to codify the DACA 
program, and to provide a pathway to citizenship.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you so much sir. I'm going to turn to 
Mr. Zibel. I recently received an e-mail from a constituent who 
was very concerned because her non-profit college is being 
merged with an out of State institution that was formerly a 
for-profit institution, but is becoming non-profit.
    And in tracking colleges that convert from for-profit to 
non-profit status, the Century Foundation found that three non-
profit schools with the most fraudulent complaints were those 
that had converted to non-profit status, but have not truly 
shifted their governance or power structures away from owners 
who had a financial interest.
    What are for-profits colleges, or why rather, are for-
profit colleges increasingly converting to non-profit status, 
and what role should the Education Department play in ensuring 
that if they say they're non-profit they actually are?
    Mr. Zibel. So I see that my time is just about up, if it I 
may permitted this briefly, I can try and do that. I think the 
reality is that the department needs to be scrutinizing 
transactions very, very carefully to make sure that what is a 
bona fide non-profit, is actually a non-profit and that a for-
profit is not acting as a non-profit.
    And I think GAO put out a report about a month and a half 
ago or so, on this issue, actually said the department was 
doing a better job of reviewing these and scrutinizing these, 
but really this isn't a one stop look at a school, it's got to 
be a long-term constant review to make sure that the people who 
are profiting before aren't still profiting after the 
transaction.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you so much and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much, thank you. I know 
it's hard remotely. Next we'll hear from Mr. Comer of Kentucky.
    Mr. Comer. Thank you Madam Chair, and I'm going to wear 
both my committee hats with these questions, my Education 
Committee as well the Oversight Committee. Over the last few 
years Congress has appropriated record levels of funding to 
universities and many universities are using it well.
    For instance, universities in my district have really 
focused on trying to provide educational opportunities that are 
focused on the workforce, and what the regional employers want 
and need and offer the best paying jobs.
    Kalamazoo University is a great example. They've adapted 
the certification process then I have some communities 
colleges--Henderson Community College, Madisonville Community 
Colleges, working on some really innovative workforce 
development type programs that are in need.
    So the funds that have been invested in those programs 
obviously have been well-spent, however there are valid 
concerns that in many other instances, many of the universities 
didn't serve the students with the best possible outcome and in 
their best interest about the taxpayers and the student.
    Last year the Trump administration issued a ruling 
clarifying that only Title IV eligible students qualify to 
receive emergency student aid funding provided by the CARES Act 
and COVID relief. The rule is currently held up in the court 
process. My question is for Dr. Burke. Do you think the rule 
was consistent with other practices related to Federal student 
aid? I'll stop there.
    Ms. Burke. Thank you Representative Comer. I do think it is 
consistent. These funds are open just to students who are Title 
IV eligible, that's consistent not only with Title IV broadly, 
but it's also consistent with other prior practices. If you 
look at the 1996 Welfare Reform Act for example, that limited 
public assistance programs to most legal immigrants for five 
years, or until they attained citizenship.
    So there's precedent there as well, not only in the 
existing Title IV program, but also in the '96 Act.
    Mr. Comer. Dr. Burke what's the most responsible way 
institutions can direct these emergency student aid dollars?
    Ms. Burke. Yes, right. So it's a great question. They 
really should target it toward students who are in the most 
need of that spending. And many of these dollars are flowing to 
universities based on the proportion of students who are Pell 
eligible, and so there is that built in system in place already 
which was a good step in the right direction I think, a good 
safeguard to put into place.
    But making sure that you know at the university level, 
they're not just giving a blanket across the board aid to every 
student in the institution of you know $1,000.00 or whatever it 
might be, but actually assessing those students who are in need 
at the university level.
    Mr. Comer. Great. Let me shift gears and talk about COVID-
19 that the health and educational institutions adapt to meet 
the challenges of COVID-19, that the Department of Education 
and Congress provided many of these institutions temporary 
relief from a lot of regulatory burdens.
    Dr. Burke are there any related modified regulations or 
guidance that Congress should re-evaluate as institutions are 
planning for future semesters?
    Ms. Burke. Sure thank you. So as I mentioned earlier I 
think there are a few regulations that are in place that do 
deserve a second look. That elastic clause that I mentioned in 
my opening testimony, I know it sounds like a very specific 
reform, but right now that enables accreditors to layer on 
numerous additional requirements on a university. Just a 
hypothetical, if an accreditor wanted to mandate a dress code, 
it's not outside of the scope of that elastic clause.
    And so removing that clause to keep what accreditors can do 
solely focused on the metrics that are contained within the 
statute of the HEA would be a very good step in the right 
direction.
    Mr. Comer. OK. That's good to know. Dr. Foxx, and Fred 
Keller, and myself are all on the Oversight Committee. We're 
really focused on the regulatory process and the change of 
administration has brought a lot of regulatory changes and 
uncertainty in a lot of different industries and education 
would be right in there.
    So we relaxed a lot of regulations during COVID, and in 
many cases that worked out very well. And I would like to make 
a lot of those relaxed regulations permanent. Obviously, we 
always have to look at the regulatory process, and education is 
no different. So I appreciate that. And Madam Chair I 
appreciate the hearing, and look forward to future hearings, 
and appreciate our witnesses for being here today. I yield 
back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. Thank you. And now 
we'll hear from Mr. Bowman of New York, who is the new Vice 
Chair of the full Education and Labor Committee, welcome. Proud 
of you.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you Madam Chair, and thank you to all the 
witnesses for being here today. My question is for Mr. 
Thornton. I'm going to start with Mr. Thornton. During your 
testimony you mentioned that at one point you didn't feel that 
college was for you, or you didn't feel that you were college 
material. I know I'm paraphrasing here.
    Can you speak to why that was? Like why did you have that 
feeling at that time?
    Mr. Thornton. Yes. Thank you so much for that Mr. Bowman. 
And the reason why I felt that way, so this was my freshman 
year. And coming into school, honestly, things began to get a 
little rough for me personally, primarily with school, being 
able to maintain the focus on being able to uphold to the 
standard of being able to achieve the school curriculum in 
terms of you know the certain classes, excuse me, that I had to 
take.
    So with that constant pressure, me putting pressure on 
myself and even with outside pressure that was not necessarily 
intentional with three of my sisters are going to college, all 
of them obtaining their master's degrees.
    I personally had some pressure that I felt in myself with 
having to reach those goals and attain that degree. And even 
with being able to not fail, and feeling like I didn't want to 
put my family's money at risk of just being wasted because of 
where I was at.
    So that's kind of the reason as to why. Those are some of 
the thoughts I was having internally as far as being able to 
stay in school.
    Mr. Bowman. Yes I know what you mean. I have three sisters 
as well, and raised by a single mom. So I know the pressure 
that the women in our lives put on us.
    Mr. Thornton. Yes.
    Mr. Bowman. To reach their standard. So how did you 
overcome it? You know what did the university provide to you in 
terms of advisers, in terms of academic support, what have you, 
how did you overcome that pressure and that feeling that you 
didn't belong? And how were you able to set yourself right?
    Mr. Thornton. Yes of course. So when it came down to 
referring whether I did, it took me having to speak up, rather 
than waiting for something or for someone to come to me and ask 
me how I was doing. So it took me reaching out to, as I 
mentioned, you know, a TRIO program instructor, Ms. Tiffany 
Tyler, who has played a huge role in my life, reaching out to 
her, speaking to her about some of these things.
    Her guiding me and really encouraging me to continue to 
push forward, and even my counterparts, my peers within the 
university. I've built long-lasting relationship through the 
TRIO program as I've mentioned 5000 Role Models as well.
    And even you know I'm part of a club here on campus as 
well. Having those people in my life, and just speaking and 
sharing my heart, sharing my life with them. There are times 
where I was able to do homework with them, study with them, and 
it really just pushed me to stay in school to think about the 
future, the ways in which I can have an impact in the world 
with a degree.
    So you know having people in my life was a huge component 
of me deciding that this is something that I can do, and 
something that I will do, and that's kind of you know pushed me 
to where I am today getting ready to graduate. So that's been a 
huge motivator for me.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you so much for sharing that. You're an 
inspiration to me personally, and to all of us, so please keep 
going brother. I appreciate you. Chancellor Oakley, since the 
onset of COVID-19 there has been an increased demand from 
mental health services as students deal with trauma, and 
economic and health crises, in addition to managing their 
school work.
    Chancellor, how have your institutions managed this 
increased need?
    Mr. Oakley. Thank you for that question Congressman. The 
mental health toll that the pandemic and the economic fallout 
has taken on our students has been significant. Many of them 
are in communities where we have had not only the economic 
impact of COVID-19, the health impacts because many of those 
communities lacked access to quality healthcare, but also the 
racial reckoning that has gripped this country, happens in the 
communities that we serve.
    So all those things have come together. We have been 
working with the Newsom administration and our legislature to 
gain access to resources that help fund mental health services. 
Our legislature has provided some of those resources. We are 
working with counties and cities to share resources, to make 
sure that our students have access to those mental health 
resources, but they are only a drop in the bucket.
    And this is an area where Congress also has been helpful 
because some of those relief funds have been used to provide 
that kind of assistance, that kind of support to our students 
who need it critically right now for them to continue their 
education.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you for that. Mr. Zibel, though 
enrollment is trending down at community colleges, the reverse 
is true for for-profit colleges. While for-profit colleges saw 
substantial and consistent enrollment drops in the years 
leading up to the pandemic, the sections enrollment spiked up 
last fall.
    This appears to be a pattern as for-profit colleges have 
saw a similar enrollment spike after the Great Recession. Do 
you have any concerns with these trends, and what lessons can 
we learn from the years following the Great Recession?
    Chairwoman Wilson. Mr. Vice Chair your time is up.
    Mr. Bowman. Oh sorry, thank you.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Someone else--he'll probably 
answer it in another question from another Member. Thank you so 
much. We'll now go to Ms. Spartz of Indiana.
    Ms. Spartz. Thank you Madam Chair. I just have a question 
to all the panel. You know we all agree we have a lot of 
problems and challenges in higher ed. I was a college faculty 
myself, and I also taught in public accounting college. It was 
a national team, a trainer for several other accounting firms. 
We had a lot of talk, a lot of discussions, a lot of different 
performances, so I understand it.
    We need to have better return on investment, following 
investments in human capital. Colleges need to have skin in the 
game, and we need to have better outcomes, not worthless 
diplomas, none of that, inflated grades and all these things 
and now the kids are not ready to life-long learning.
    So my question is we had lots of talk, lots of discussion, 
proposal but nothing ever gets done. So my question is, and 
I'll start with Dr. Burke, is there any prospects where 
actually something gets done, or we'll be discussing for next 
10 years how we're going to reform higher ed and nothing is 
going to happen.
    So what are your thoughts on the prospect of anything 
happening in the near future.
    Ms. Burke. Thank you for that question Congresswoman 
Spartz. So I think the prospect for reforms like moving on 
either short-term Pell, or enabling students to use their Title 
IV funds for shorter term courses. I think the prospects are 
pretty good for that in terms of bipartisan support overall.
    There are, of course, some inherent concerns with some of 
these proposals that you don't increase spending overall on 
these programs when you enable those dollars to flow to shorter 
term courses, but I think that there are ways to structure 
those reforms to make sure that the cap remains tight, but 
still enable students to have more flexibility and to make 
those dollars more nimble.
    Ms. Spartz. But I'm talking about better outcomes in all 
postsecondary education, so having real reform when we 
understand that you know, we should bring some value right? If 
we're going to invest in human capital, and use taxpayers money 
particularly to do that, we need to have a return on 
investment.
    And colleges need to have skin in the game, and they 
shouldn't be piling up all this debt on these kids, a lot of 
them, with no jobs right? Because I only care if you have a 
job, and you have some meaningful employment that it brings 
some value.
    So is there any prospect of having that ever accomplished?
    Ms. Burke. So I do think that there is some agreement that 
in general the current metrics for example, the cohort default 
rate, are just really not cutting it in terms of providing the 
data that we need and the, you know, oversight that we need for 
some of these institutions.
    And so there are conversations that are happening about 
changing that metric to something maybe closer to a 
programmatic default rate that could work better. There is 
still going to be problems inherent in that approach as well, 
and so to my mind it all comes back to the fact that we are 
even having this conversation because Federal taxpayers are 
implicated, and financing so much of the higher education 
system today.
    So winding down the debt in the student loan program, I 
think is a necessary precondition for reigning in costs and 
providing some needed accountability.
    Ms. Spartz. Yes our colleges do have to have skin in the 
game too.
    Ms. Burke. Yes.
    Ms. Spartz. So I'm sure. Dr. And Mr. Zibel and Mr. Oakley, 
and maybe Mr. Thornton quickly. Do you think there is any 
prospect of meaningful reform in the near future? Yes, no, 
because I'm not sure how much time I have left.
    Mr. Zibel. I actually think there is Congresswoman, and 
especially you know if you talk about skin in the game, and 
making sure that there's value.
    I think one of the most important things that 
administration can do is bring back the Gainful Employment 
Rule, which was designed to solve exactly the kind of problems 
that you were just referring to where students are graduating 
from programs without any prospect of employment in 
relationship to the amount of debt that they are taking.
    Secretary DeVos repealed that rule. And you know I'm 
hopeful that the Department of Education can bring it back, and 
actually give it time to work going forward.
    Ms. Spartz. Mr. Oakley?
    Mr. Oakley. Short answer is yes. I see a lot of reform 
happening. The fact that you have a person from a community 
college testifying today means that things are changing, that 
we are recognizing the value that institutions like community 
colleges provide to the country. So I'm very hopeful and I see 
a lot of change in California.
    Ms. Spartz. OK. Well hopefully we'll stay optimistic and 
get some hope. Mr. Thornton what do you think? You're probably 
new to all this.
    Mr. Thornton. Yes I definitely am new to all this. But I 
would say that I do have hope and faith that there will be a 
change moving forward in the future. I'm excited to see how 
things continue to grow and to progress as Mr. Oakley attested 
to. You know, him coming from a community college background I 
think is amazing just to see him here now, and just even having 
that same dream and hope for other people that were in his 
position.
    So I definitely feel good moving forward to see some 
changes in America.
    Ms. Spartz. OK thank you. I will stay hopeful, and I'll 
yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much. And a 
veteran Member of the committee now, I yield to Mr. Pocan. How 
are you, Wisconsin.
    Mr. Pocan. Very good thank you Madam Chair, and I 
appreciate. Thanks to the witnesses, and my apologies to 
everyone for coming back and forth. Every vote we have is 45 
minutes. Unfortunately, we have about 100 colleagues who have 
not been vaccinated so we can't shorten the time period, and 
it's chaotic because of it. So my apologies up front.
    A very quick yes/no question Dr. Burke. I'm hoping, I'm not 
sure if I heard something right. Were you just talking about 
winding down the student loan programs? Is that a yes or no in 
the near future?
    Ms. Burke. Yes.
    Mr. Pocan. OK yes. Thank you. I'll move on. So Mr. 
Thornton. I was someone who when I went to school I grew up in 
a lower middle class family, got lots of student loans, Pell 
Grants, things that Ms. Burke apparently doesn't like.
    And that's why I was able to go to college, and get a 
degree and appreciate, you know, what you're talking about 
right now and the support that you got. I think also part of 
the testimony was that all this money went to the 
administrative ether at universities, but I assume you like me, 
don't consider our lives administrative ether.
    You talked a little bit in your opening remarks about how 
some of the support from the programs that we've done with 
COVID helped you very directly to be able to continue to be 
able to go to school. Can you talk a little more, just a little 
more about that, or about any friend's stories also that have 
been helped because of the programs that Congress did around 
COVID?
    Mr. Thornton. Yes. Thank you so much for that Mr. Pocan. 
And I could speak for myself personally, kind of like what I 
mentioned as far as the last semester, the fall semester that 
just passed. Me initially having a job, me being able to take 
care of myself financially, whether it be with school expenses, 
or expenses outside of school whether it was rent or bills.
    Me losing my job put me in a position to where I just 
really had to take a lot from my personal savings, so with the 
funding that was provided I was able to provide for myself in 
different ways, primarily with school and you know school 
materials.
    And in addition to that things outside of school. So the 
funding that was provided definitely played a huge role in my 
life personally, and you know I could definitely speak about 
that for sure.
    Mr. Pocan. Thank you. What's your major by the way? I don't 
know if I caught that because we're always back and forth. I 
didn't catch that.
    Mr. Thornton. Oh yes of course. My major is recreation and 
sports management.
    Mr. Pocan. Awesome. Well I wish you great fortune with 
that, and thanks so much for being here and sharing your 
stories. A question for Chancellor Oakley. You know we just had 
a staff assistant position open in my office. We got 330 
applications for it, and we noticed a lot of them graduated in 
May 2020 and have not had a job since then, obviously because 
of COVID.
    Is there anything that universities are doing, or should be 
doing to kind of help that student, that this year has been an 
incredibly tough year? Many of them probably are living back 
home because we noticed the addresses are from around the 
country. But what can we do to help those students, because you 
know, I'm glad that they were able to get the education, but I 
know the next connecting step is to a good job.
    Mr. Oakley. So very quickly. I mean working with employers, 
working with industries to provide for some type of paid 
internship I think is critical for all college graduates to 
have the opportunity to get into the workforce as soon as 
things start to open up.
    It's critically important that college students have access 
to have the skills that they need, but also in terms of what 
they need to do the work, but how to exist in a place of 
employment. So I think we need to double our efforts to help 
students get some sort of workforce opportunity, internship or 
other paid workforce training.
    Mr. Pocan. Great. Thank you. And then a final followup if I 
can because I have to go to vote on this series now. It has to 
do with Dr. Burke's question that we need to wind down our 
financial aid programs, that there's just too much of a largess 
out there.
    Mr. Oakley. Well I think we agree on the umbrella which is 
there is too much debt. I do think that we need to continue to 
improve the amount of resources that we're providing to the 
lowest income Americans and help them pay for the cost of 
attending college which continues to increase.
    Mr. Pocan. And that includes more Pell I would assume.
    Mr. Oakley. Absolutely.
    Mr. Pocan. Great. Thank you very much. I yield back Madam 
Chair.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you, thank you. According to my 
records Ms. Harshbarger of Tennessee you can go on the record. 
Mr. Fulcher of Idaho? Ms. Stefanik of New York? Mr. Banks of 
Indiana? Ms. Omar of Minnesota.
    Ms. Omar. Thank you very much chairwoman, and thanks to all 
our witnesses for joining us. To Mr. Pocan's point it's been a 
really busy day, so I do apologize if some of the questions I 
ask have already been asked of you. Even before the COVID-19 
pandemic hit, there were many students who were struggling to 
cover the cost of basic needs like housing, food and childcare.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has added to many of the hurdles 
faced by minority and low-income students working to complete 
their college educations. And these challenges are compounded 
for student parents.
    A recent report including the GAO study, has highlighted 
the challenges that a student parents face in terms of college 
persistence and completion. Madam Chair I request unanimous 
consent to enter this into the record.
    Chairwoman Wilson. So ordered.
    Ms. Omar. Chancellor Oakley, how have child center closures 
affected the ability of student parents to remain in school?
    Mr. Oakley. This has had a devastating effect on our 
students, and thank you for that question Congresswoman. This 
has had a devastating effect. So many of our students in the 
California community colleges, and this is true of community 
colleges across the Nation, are working parents.
    And so lack of access to childcare, and the fact that so 
many of them have had their children in their household having 
to work on educating them remotely, sharing Wi-Fi with them, 
all of these have created challenges that have made it very 
difficult for working parents to continue their education.
    Ms. Omar. I appreciate that. I was a working parent when I 
completed my college education, and so I'm wondering if there 
is any support that colleges are providing currently to this 
vulnerable student group, and if you have any recommendations 
for Congress to provide support.
    Mr. Oakley. Well I think right now the most important thing 
to do is to provide these working parents, these students, 
direct emergency support. They need economic support right now, 
so that when they're making choices about whether to feed their 
family, or to continue to enroll in college, we don't force 
them into those choices.
    So I think we need them to participate in the economy. We 
need them to complete their education, so I think investing 
directly in supporting these working students is critical to 
our future, and to an equitable recovery.
    Ms. Omar. And how do you see the creation of an environment 
that does set these students up for success post-COVID?
    Mr. Oakley. So I think it's critical that we work with 
employers, that we work with labor organizations that support 
these working parents to focus on insuring that we provide what 
they need to get into jobs that pay a livable wage so they can 
support their families.
    Ms. Omar. I appreciate that. Madam Chair I will yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you so much. I see Mr. Fulcher 
from Idaho's camera on. I'm not sure if he is available? We'll 
go now to Ms. Sherrill of New Jersey? Mr. Espaillat of New 
York? Mr. Grijalva of Arizona? And a true, true veteran of the 
Education Committee Mr. Courtney of Connecticut, he's here.
    Mr. Courtney. Thank you Chairwoman Wilson, and thank you to 
all the witnesses. Keith, your testimony has been really 
stellar, and you know, congratulations to you and the Chairman 
for the great work that you and her work in terms of you know, 
creating these kinds of pathways for young people.
    Mr. Zibel I have actually been watching a little bit out of 
the corner of my eye during the hearing. Chairman Powell from 
the Federal Reserve is sort of giving his sort of update 
regarding the economy, and announced that again, the sort of 
low interest rate, zero percent policy--monetary policy, of the 
Federal Reserve is actually going to continue through 2023.
    I mean a very I think, you know forceful policy position to 
keep borrowing costs down. And as we know, you know, for the 
last year that's been the policy, and people in the private 
sector have benefited greatly from it. You know residential 
property owners, credit card debt, car loan debt, but you know 
the one form of debt that is still stuck with the higher 
interest rates is student loan debt.
    And you know President Biden's pause, which is a good thing 
in terms of helping people's cash-flow, who are student loan 
borrowers, that expires at the end of September 2021. And so, 
you know, potentially you know those higher interest rates are 
going to snap back into place.
    Again, even if there is student loan forgiveness of 
$10,000.00 or $50,000.00, there's still going to be a lot of 
debt left over there. And so you know I was wondering if you 
could sort of talk about it from a consumer point of view. I 
mean the only decisionmaker that can change that is Congress.
    That's pretty well understood as the President really is 
not a unilateral authority under the Higher Education 
Authorization to cut rates by himself, and we've done that a 
number of times over you know the time that Frederica and I 
have been in Congress.
    You know it just seems like it screams out for action by 
Congress not to let these interest rates snap back, and first 
to do something about taking advantage of the low interest rate 
environment. And I was wondering if you could comment on that.
    Mr. Zibel. Certainly, Congressman. It's an excellent 
question and I should caveat this was you know I'm not an 
economist. I'm a lawyer. But you know, just as a matter of 
principle I think that everything you are saying makes a lot of 
sense. There is no reason why student loan borrowers should be 
saddled with higher interest rates than you know, other 
financial products.
    I think Congress would be well to look at reforms to the 
Bankruptcy Code. Student loans are not dischargeable in 
bankruptcy for the most part, and that is something that I 
think both the administration and Congress could be taking a 
look at to really try and bring relief to borrowers who are 
struggling so immensely right now.
    Mr. Courtney. Well thank you. Again we've tried actually in 
the last few Congresses, myself, Frederica and others have you 
know cosponsored bills to bring down the interest rates. And 
again, given Chairman Powell's announcement today, I mean it 
really is more than high time for us to move out and create 
some parody in terms of lending costs for people with student 
loan debt.
    And you know Mr. Oakley, I don't know if you have any sort 
of comment on that. I realize maybe you know the interest rate 
issue for current students is not as urgent, but certainly you 
know, later in life it could really pose a real hindrance on 
their success.
    Mr. Oakley. Well absolutely. I mean all the things that 
were just mentioned, and I certainly support Mr. Zibel's 
characterization of the challenge. We need Congress to act to 
support students who do have to take out these loans by 
reducing the interest rate, by allowing them to go through 
bankruptcy court.
    So these are issues that saddle our students for decades. 
And in many ways keep them from participating meaningful in the 
American economy, and from creating wealth.
    Mr. Courtney. Great. Well thank you. You know just to share 
with the committee and the witnesses, I had a constituent who 
emailed the other day about a student loan bill that he 
received, which again was paying 7.8 percent interest. Again, 
totally trapped.
    And there was a warning quote in there that only the U.S. 
Congress can lower that rate. Because you know I'm sure that 
the loan servicer is getting bombarded with questions about why 
do I still have to pay 7.8 percent interest when you know, 
everything else is you know close to zero.
    And I think you know they're basically saying call your 
Congressman. So hopefully, you know, more people will talk 
about that, because it really is something that we as a 
committee should take a look at. And with that I yield back 
Madam Chairwoman.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you very much. Mr. Fulcher I see 
from Idaho, I see you back and forth. You are on camera. You're 
next. Mr. Fulcher are you going to join us? If not we'll go to 
Ms. Bonamici.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you Madam Chair. And thank you to all 
the witnesses. In particular, I want to thank Mr. Thornton. 
Thank you so much for sharing your experience. It's really 
helpful for us to learn from. I also want to not let it go 
unsaid that there are with regard to Dr. Burke's comments about 
limiting borrowing based on someone's course of study, multiple 
issues and problems with that, particularly from the equity 
perspective.
    And very subjective who makes that decision, and you know, 
just take a look someday at what philosophy majors make. 
They're very successful because they know how to think 
critically, and employers are looking for skills like empathy 
and teamwork, and problem solving. Those are all things that 
come from studying broad fields, including the humanities.
    So I want to turn to Chancellor Oakley. Nice to see you 
again. We know there are serious inequities in higher 
education, and that's true in Oregon and across the country 
even before the COVID-19 pandemic, and students were already 
struggling to cover not just the cost of tuition, but we know 
other expenses, housing, transportation, childcare, food.
    Now there are unexpected costs because of the pandemic 
adding to it. And particularly for community college students 
like I was, these costs are significantly higher than the costs 
of tuition. So Chancellor Oakley, recent reports including a 
GAO study have highlighted food and housing insecurity, and I 
have spoken with college students, particularly community 
college students in Oregon about this.
    I'd like to enter the GAO report into the record Madam 
Chair.
    Chairwoman Wilson. So ordered.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. So Chancellor, how are the 
California community colleges providing for example, case 
management and services to low-income students, and how are you 
connecting them with resources like those that are available 
through SNAP, WIC and TANF? And how are you making sure the 
students access those resources while they're not physically on 
campus?
    Mr. Oakley. Thank you for that question Congresswoman 
Bonamici. You are absolutely right. There was a huge crisis in 
our system before the pandemic. We saw record amounts of food 
insecurity. Record amounts of housing insecurity and the 
pandemic has significantly exacerbated the problem.
    So we have been working first and foremost, we are a 
community college, we are working with cities, with non-profit 
institutions, in localities where we exist in providing support 
for our students.
    We've provided support for technology, for food through 
food pantries, and things of that nature. We've also worked 
with our legislature and Governor Newsom to provide emergency 
aid. Just a few weeks ago the legislature passed an emergency 
action package that provides emergency support directly to 
students, which will support their needs for food and housing 
insecurity, as well as mental health services and other things 
that are impacting them right now.
    We've also continued to advocate to you all, to Congress, 
and to this new administration of the need to provide this 
direct emergency support. I understand----
    Ms. Bonamici. Chancellor, I don't want to interrupt but I--
--
    Mr. Oakley. That's quite all right.
    Ms. Bonamici. ----I have a consumer protection background, 
so I absolutely must get a question in for Mr. Zibel. Thank you 
so much for being here. The Obama administration as you know, 
established the Borrower Defense Rule to streamline the process 
for students to assert their right to loan forgiveness when 
they're defrauded by the institution.
    Unfortunately, the Trump administration failed to implement 
the rule and give students the relief they deserve. So what can 
the Biden administration do immediately to address the problems 
with Borrower Defense that were created by the past 
administration?
    Mr. Zibel. Sure. Thank you for the question. There is a lot 
the department can do, and I think most immediately it's taking 
the issue seriously, providing relief, 100 percent relief to 
the borrowers who it has already determined to have been 
defrauded by a predatory college.
    There is simply no excuse at this point in time for the 
department dragging its heels on that. I want to, you know the 
consequences for these borrowers, it's devastating for them for 
an economic impact, housing impact, mental health impacts.
    But the other point that I want to emphasize on this is 
that these are borrowers who really feel like not only did 
their school fail them, but their government failed them. Their 
government failed them by putting a seal of approval on these 
schools, leading them down a path, and then not giving 
forgiveness, even though they've already made sufficient 
findings to do so.
    Ms. Bonamici. In my remaining few seconds, just to followup 
on that. Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
were talking about complaining about what they call 
administrative bloat. But actually some of the worst bloat I'm 
aware of is when colleges use Federal funds to advertise for 
perspective students.
    Recent data indicates that colleges spend 730 million 
dollars on advertising and degree granting for-profit 
institutions, and that's you know 40 percent of all higher 
education advertising spending for just 6 percent of the 
students, so that is something that I would say is 
administrative bloat we should be looking at is what the for-
profits institutions are doing to try to recruit on often-times 
students.
    So I see my time is over, and I yield back. Thank you Madam 
Chair.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. You have a lot of seniority 
but your time is up. And now Mr. Scott, esteemed Chairman of 
the entire committee on Education and Labor. Do you want to 
close us out?
    Mr. Scott. I'll try. Thank you very much. Let me first ask 
Ms. Burke you mentioned we talked about short-term Pell's, but 
I think there's a consensus that this is a good idea. The only 
caveat we have is people open up little storefronts and 
stealing all the money, dealing out worthless credentials.
    We want to limit those privately to community colleges, and 
referrals from job training, workforce investment, Opportunity 
Act boards. Do you think that would be sufficient to keep these 
in the hands of those that are actually using them well?
    Ms. Burke. I think coupled with some State accreditation 
reform efforts as in enabling states to make some determination 
about which industries within their state could provide those 
short-term courses. I think that would be a good step in the 
right direction to actually push it down to the State level, 
that oversight role, in terms of quality assurance of these 
programs.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. And let me ask Dr. Oakley. We have a 
lot of suggestions on how to spend a lot of money on colleges, 
and could you give us an idea of your priorities talking about 
either free college, or free community college, double the Pell 
Grant, loan discharge programs like public service loan 
forgiveness, a borrower defense, or income contingent, or 
discharging loans $10,000.00 or $50,000.00, or eliminate 
interest on loans.
    Could you tell us what we ought to be looking at first?
    Mr. Oakley. Thank you Mr. Chair. First of all I mean all of 
those issues are important issues to our students, but for us I 
mean first and foremost allowing students to pay for the total 
cost of attending college is critical, so that they can attend 
full-time, so that they can complete their education and get 
into the workforce.
    So things like doubling Pell is critically important. Free 
community college is certainly important, so that the funds 
that you make available can be spent on the total cost of 
attending college. And then finally I'd say supporting 
colleges, community colleges in particular to reach out to 
displaced workers, and helping get the skills that they need to 
get back into the workforce.
    Mr. Scott. We've heard a couple of comments about the 
interest rates. What about significantly reducing, or even 
eliminating interest. Why is the Federal Government charging 
people interest? We ought to be subsidizing loans, not using it 
as a profit center.
    Mr. Oakley. Well I would certainly agree that a low or no 
interest loans to our students who are struggling and who need 
that support to get into the economy is a very important step 
that Congress could take.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Mr. Zibel during the Obama 
administration the Department of Education worked with the 
State law enforcement agencies, especially attorneys general to 
investigate and hold for-profit colleges accountable. Can you 
talk about what happened during the last 4 years, and whether 
or not executives at for-profit colleges should be held 
personally liable for misconduct, or financial losses to 
students and taxpayers?
    Mr. Zibel. Certainly, Mr. Chairman. Look, the Department of 
Education has to be working alongside State and other Federal 
partners. This should not be an adversarial relationship, as I 
think it has been over the past 4 years. In terms of 
institutional enforcement I see what the Department of 
Education did in the Corinthian colleges matter.
    It's a real example of when the department worked alongside 
the office of then Attorney General Kamala Harris to bring an 
enforcement action, and take an action against one of the most 
predatory actors.
    When schools are closing, the department has to be working 
with states to make sure that student needs are met in terms of 
transfers, and transcript availability and basic needs around 
housing.
    So I think that is a real important step that the 
department has to be taking going forward. In terms of personal 
liability, I think I mentioned a little bit earlier, 
absolutely. This is not a proposal that we have come up with. 
This is not a proposal that must have been developed in the 
past year or two, this is something that Congress put into the 
Higher Education Act about 30 years ago.
    And you know President George H.W. Bush signed it into law. 
It was passed by a bipartisan Congress. And I think that the 
concept is really simple. That when there are institutions that 
cause losses to students and taxpayers, they should be held 
accountable, and the individuals that directed that conduct 
should be held accountable.
    The Securities and Exchange Commission for example does it 
even for for-profit college executives about protecting 
investors. But for some reason the Department of Education has 
not done that to protect students.
    So this is about deterring misconduct. If you know that you 
personally may have to write a check at the end of the day, you 
are probably going to be a lot better of a steward of a 
taxpayer and student funds.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. And thank you Madam Chair. And I want 
to thank Keith for being with us today. He's certainly an 
example of why we're here. And certainly, a shining example of 
why the 5,000 Role Models of Excellence are so important. So 
thank you Keith for being with us today.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you so much Mr. Chair. 
I remind my colleagues that pursuant to committee practice, 
materials for submission of the hearing record must be 
submitted to the Committee Clerk within 14 days following the 
last day of the hearing.
    So by close of business on March 31, 2021 preferably in 
Microsoft Word format. The materials submitted must address the 
subject matter of the hearing. Only a Member of the 
subcommittee, or an invited witness may submit materials for 
inclusion in the hearing record.
    Documents are limited to 50 pages each. Documents longer 
than 50 pages will be incorporated into the record by way of an 
internet link that you must provide to the Committee Clerk 
within the required timeframe.
    But please recognize that in the future that link may no 
longer work. Pursuant to House rules and regulations, items for 
the record must be submitted to the Clerk electronically by 
email submissions to [email protected].
    Members are encouraged to submit materials to the inbox 
before the hearing, or during the hearing at the time the 
Member makes the request. Again, I want to thank the witnesses 
for their participation today. Keith you have made FIU, Miami-
Dade County Public Schools so proud.
    We love you. 5,000 Role Models love you. We are 5,000. I 
want to thank you, all of the witnesses. You were absolutely 
stupendous. You did a great job at our committee today. Members 
of the subcommittee may have some additional questions for each 
of you and we ask the witnesses to please respond to those 
questions in writing.
    The hearing record will be held open for 14 days in order 
to receive those responses. I remind my colleagues that 
pursuant to committee practice witness questions for the 
hearing record, must be submitted to the Majority Committee 
Staff or Committee Clerk within 7 days. The questions submitted 
must address the subject matter of the hearing.
    We're now into closing statements. I recognize the 
Distinguished Ranking Member for a closing statement, Dr. 
Murphy who is a medical doctor.
    Mr. Murphy. Thank you Ms. Representative Wilson. I want to 
thank you especially, but also thank the committee Members and 
the panelists. I think this was an excellent, excellent 
meeting, and a lot of good issues discussed.
    And I think there was a lot of lessons learned today. Both 
Democrats and Republicans, I think we agree. We agree very 
plainly that our postsecondary education system is in need of 
reform. I mean I think that I can say that without any doubt. 
Everybody knows that things have got a little bit out of hand.
    Where the reform may be, may be in question, and difference 
of opinion about and amongst the panelists and the committee, 
but I think reform my all means is a consensus statement.
    College costs are obviously way too high, and continue to 
rise. We simply cannot continue the rise of college costs as 
they are today. We are bankrupting our students. We are doing a 
disservice to our taxpayers. We simply cannot allow that. 
Graduation rates are low, honestly embarrassingly low.
    I look at some institutions 6 year graduation rates are in 
the teens, and that's not acceptable. We're doing a disservice 
to those students, and again to the taxpayers. Employers are 
finding recent graduates, college graduates, ill-prepared for 
college success. And that burden rests solely on our educators.
    If these kids are paying so much and mortgaging their 
future, our educators have the burden of making sure that 
they're prepared and that their money was well-spent. You don't 
continue the status quo. You don't continue to pour money into 
programs that have been proven failures. They're not failing 
because of lack of money. They're failing because they were bad 
and poorly designed programs.
    Congress acted quickly last year in a bipartisan fashion to 
help the sector deal with the pandemic. I was very, very proud 
to be a Member of Congress at that time because we saw the 
American people, and we saw institutions in America as needing 
our help and we got together in a bipartisan manner.
    Most recently, not so bipartisan, and that's in my opinion, 
a real shame that that occurred. But now Congress has to turn 
to long-term issues. The Higher Education Act is in dire need 
of reform to better serve our students. The disaster, and I 
spoke about this earlier, of the rise of administrative bloat 
must be reversed.
    We cannot continue pouring money into institutions that do 
not use it toward education and preparing our students for 
success and lifelong learning. Some policy solutions have been 
presented at the hearing, eliminate the Grad Plus Program, 
allow institutions to limit borrowing on a programmatic basis, 
an entrance into the marketplace by enabling short-term Pell 
Grants and reforming the accreditation system, and also--and a 
recent topic, I think reforming the interest rates on these 
loans. By all means, I think that needs to be done, especially 
with what we're talking about with zero rates.
    I don't think loan forgiveness. All you're doing is passing 
that on to individuals who actually paid for their education, 
who actually worked for their education, I don't think that is 
appropriate.
    Not all of the ideas are bipartisan, by all means. But I 
want to encourage the subcommittee to work to find workable 
solutions under Madam Wilson's leadership, and I have pledged 
to work together in a bipartisan manner for us to actually do 
what's great for our students and what's good for their 
success. Thank you Madam Chairman I will yield back.
    Chairwoman Wilson. Thank you. Thank you Doctor. I now 
recognize myself for the purpose of making my closing 
statement. I want to again thank our expert witnesses for 
joining our subcommittee's first hearing of this Congress, and 
for your testimonies.
    Our discussion today made clear that the relief funding we 
provided for higher education over the last year has been 
critical to helping both institutions and students weather the 
Coronavirus pandemic. But we were also reminded that both 
Congress and the Biden administration have much work to do to 
ensure underserved students are not left behind in our recovery 
from this pandemic.
    Securing relief funding alone is a disservice to the 
students. We must take bold steps to strengthen student 
protections and expand access to student aid, so that we build 
back a better higher education system for everyone.
    This committee has a great responsibility to not only help 
our higher education system survive this pandemic, but also 
ensure that all students across this Nation have access, if 
they want it, to a college degree that leads to a rewarding 
career. I look forward to working with my colleagues to achieve 
this ultimate goal.
    If there is no further business before this committee 
without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. And thank 
you so much for joining us.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    [Whereupon, at 3:51 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                 [all]