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


                  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN
                SERVICES, EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                         APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2022

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 HEARINGS

                                 BEFORE A

                           SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                       COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                     ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                              FIRST SESSION

                               ___________

               SUBCOMMITTEE ON LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 
                      EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES

                   ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut, Chair

  LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California	TOM COLE, Oklahoma	
  BARBARA LEE, California		ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
  MARK POCAN, Wisconsin			CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee
  KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts	JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
  LOIS FRANKEL, Florida			JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
  CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois		BEN CLINE, Virginia
  BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
  BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
  JOSH HARDER, California


  NOTE: Under committee rules, Ms. DeLauro, as chair of the full 
committee, and Ms. Granger, as ranking minority member of the full 
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.

      Stephen Steigleder, Jennifer Cama, Jaclyn Kilroy, Jared Bass,
    Philip Tizzani, Laurie Mignone, Rebecca Salay, and Trish Castaneda
                            Subcommittee Staff
                                 _________

                                  PART 6

                                                                   Page
  Department of Health and Human 
Services................................
                                                                      1
  Building Capacity, Building Community: 
Increasing Investments in Community 
Colleges................................
                                                                     93
  U.S. Department of Labor..............
                                                                    171
  U.S. Department of Education..........
                                                                    259
  Mental Health Emergencies: Building a 
Robust Crisis Response System...........
                                                                    345

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                                   

                                ____________
                                
         Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations                       
                                
                                
                       U.S GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
46-639                      WASHINGTON : 2022                       


                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                                ----------                              
                  ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut, Chair


  MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
  DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina
  LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California
  SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
  BARBARA LEE, California
  BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
  TIM RYAN, Ohio
  C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
  DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
  HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
  CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
  MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
  DEREK KILMER, Washington
  MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania
  GRACE MENG, New York
  MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
  KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts
  PETE AGUILAR, California
  LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
  CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois
  BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
  BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
  NORMA J. TORRES, California
  CHARLIE CRIST, Florida
  ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
  ED CASE, Hawaii
  ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
  JOSH HARDER, California
  JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
  DAVID J. TRONE, Maryland
  LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois
  SUSIE LEE, Nevada

  KAY GRANGER, Texas
  HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky
  ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
  MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
  JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
  KEN CALVERT, California
  TOM COLE, Oklahoma
  MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
  STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
  JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
  CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee
  JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
  DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
  ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
  MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
  CHRIS STEWART, Utah
  STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi
  DAVID G. VALADAO, California
  DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
  JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
  JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
  BEN CLINE, Virginia
  GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
  MIKE GARCIA, California
  ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa
  TONY GONZALES, Texas

                 Robin Juliano, Clerk and Staff Director

                                   (ii)

 
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, EDUCATION, AND RELATED 
                    AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2022

                                          Thursday, April 15, 2021.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                                WITNESS

HON. XAVIER BECERRA, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN 
    SERVICES
    The Chair. The hearing will come to order.
    As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few 
housekeeping matters. For today's meeting, the chair or staff 
designated by the chair may mute participants' microphones when 
they are not under recognition for the purposes of eliminating 
inadvertent background noise.
    Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves. 
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask you 
if you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate 
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
    I remind all members and Mr. Secretary that the 5-minute 
clock still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will 
move to the next member until the issue is resolved, and you 
will retain the balance of your time.
    You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how 
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will 
turn yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the 
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When 
your time has expired, the clock will turn red, and I will 
begin to recognize the next member.
    In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the 
chair and ranking member. Then members present at the time the 
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of 
seniority and, finally, members not present at the time the 
hearing is called to order.
    Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have 
set up an email address to which members can send anything they 
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups. 
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
    And with that, I would like to acknowledge the ranking 
member of the subcommittee, Congressman Tom Cole, and all the 
members of the subcommittee on both sides of the aisle who are 
joining today's hearing.
    And I would like to congratulate and welcome a former 
colleague and dear, dear friend, Secretary Xavier Becerra, to 
his first hearing as Secretary of the Department of Health and 
Human Services.
    Today, we are looking forward to discussing HHS's 2022 
budget priorities, the Department's ongoing response to the 
COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the Biden-Harris administration's 
overall response to the many longstanding problems and 
inequities in our healthcare system that this pandemic has 
underscored and exacerbated this past year.
    This is the Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations 
Subcommittee's first budget hearing on the Biden-Harris 
administration's 2022 budget request. In the coming weeks, we 
will also hold budget hearings with Secretary Miguel Cardona, 
Department of Education, on April 27; Secretary Marty Walsh, 
Department of Labor, on April 28; NIH Director Francis Collins, 
along with other NIH IC Directors, in May; and CDC Director 
Rochelle Walensky, along with other CDC leaders, in May as 
well.
    In addition, in May, the subcommittee will hold a hearing 
with public witnesses, as well as a hearing for House members 
to highlight their requests for 2022. The subcommittee will 
circulate further information in the coming weeks on hearings 
in May once the dates and details have been confirmed.
    Mr. Secretary, as I am sure you are very well aware, you 
are taking over leadership of one of the most important 
departments in the Federal Government. And it is an immensely 
critical time for this country as we recover from simultaneous 
public health and economic emergencies. This administration has 
made a strong start, and you certainly deserve credit for the 
many public health and economic recoveries that are currently 
taking shape.
    In responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, this administration 
increased daily vaccine doses to more than 3 million doses per 
day, which puts us well on the way to achieving the President's 
updated goal of 200 million doses in his first 100 days.
    Tuesday's news of the pause on the Janssen/J&J vaccine may 
complicate our vaccination efforts, but we must have confidence 
in all of our vaccines as we combat COVID-19. I am grateful 
that this administration is committed to following the science.
    President Biden also took decisive action to respond to the 
economic crisis by proposing the American Rescue Plan, a 
$1,900,000,000,000 relief plan to help American families. Most 
recently, the President proposed a bold plan to rebuild the 
Nation's infrastructure, including the care economy, which 
forms the backbone of the overall economy. The President's 
proposal includes an additional $25,000,000,000 for childcare 
facilities, $400,000,000,000 for home and community-based care, 
including resources and support for the millions of workers, 
mostly women of color, who provide these important care 
services for our loved ones.
    This new investment will build on the $50,000,000,000 that 
the Congress provided for children through the American Rescue 
Plan and the December emergency supplemental appropriations 
bill. And now the administration is once again taking the lead 
by submitting a fiscal year 2022 budget request for HHS with 
investments in health and human services that would improve the 
lives of millions of American families.
    The investments are vital. After a decade of sequestration 
and constraints and 2-year budget deals, we are finally 
beginning to address the needs of our Nation's families, 
children, and underserved communities. We are finally beginning 
to address systematic shortfalls in our health and human 
services programs through the American Jobs Plan, the 
forthcoming American Families Plan, and annual discretionary 
appropriations.
    Many of the issues that have become all the more apparent 
in the wake of the pandemic--issues like maternal health 
crisis, childcare crisis, mental health crisis, and the gun 
violence crisis--had already reached a breaking point even 
before the pandemic began, which is why I am so pleased to see 
that the administration is doubling funding for gun violence 
prevention research, which is a priority that I fought for and 
succeeded in securing for the first time in 20 years in 2019.
    This budget proposal and this administration's response to 
the COVID-19 pandemic is certainly a great step in the right 
direction, but we are not running a mile here, we are running a 
marathon. Our public health infrastructure utterly collapsed 
under the weight of this pandemic, and while this budget 
addresses some of the failures that occurred in this system, 
there is still more work to be done.
    We need to consider how we are going to address the 
failures that cause 700 American women to die in childbirth 
each year. How are we going to address the failures that have 
led to 1 in 20 U.S. adults suffering from a serious mental 
illness? How are we going to address the failures that are 
pushing more women out of the workforce every day because they 
do not have access to quality, affordable childcare?
    This budget includes a record $8,700,000,000 for the CDC 
and $10,700,000,000 to address the opioid epidemic. It also 
includes $19,800,000,000 for HHS childcare and early education 
programs, an increase of $2,900,000,000 to expand access to 
quality, affordable childcare, Head Start, and preschool. It 
includes $1,600,000,000 to address the mental health crisis, as 
well as $200,000,000 for maternal health.
    Significant investments that are desperately needed to 
address critical programs, and I am confident this budget 
continues to move in the right direction. Combined with the 
American Jobs Plan and the American Families Plan, this budget 
will improve the lives of the American people.
    Mr. Secretary, it is time to be ambitious. We need a budget 
and a role for Government that invests to give us a better 
future.
    Let me focus for a moment on women's health. Thank you for 
releasing proposed regulations this week to end the Title X gag 
rule. This action will ensure that people across the country 
have access to affordable reproductive healthcare and 
lifesaving cancer screenings. More than 1,000 health centers 
left the Title X program due to the gag rule.
    In my State of Connecticut, New Haven is now the only place 
in the State where people can access Title X providers. We look 
forward to this rule being swiftly finalized so we can begin to 
repair the damage of the past 4 years.
    I hope you build on this progress by dropping the Hyde 
Amendment from your full budget. The time has come to reckon 
with the status quo and view this issue through the lens of 
racial equity. As I have said before, while the Labor, HHS, 
Education bill has carried the Hyde Amendment every year since 
1976, 2021 is the last year.
    The Hyde Amendment is a discriminatory policy, denies low-
income women access to abortion, and that particularly hits 
low-income women of color. The inequities in our country's 
healthcare system that have been exposed by the COVID-19 
pandemic all further expose the impact of the Hyde Amendment. 
Now is the time to empower all women to be able to make deeply 
personal life decisions without politicians inserting 
themselves into the doctor's office.
    I also want to raise the issue of the unaccompanied 
children currently in our care at the U.S.-Mexico border. I 
recognize, Mr. Secretary, that you inherited a difficult and a 
challenging situation, as a record number of children are 
fleeing traumatic circumstances and are seeking to be reunified 
with family in the United States.
    I am encouraged by your commitment to return this program 
to its human services mission of protecting vulnerable 
children. However, I will continue to push for a more 
transparent program. Oversight and monitoring of these 
facilities, especially with these large numbers of children, 
will be more important than ever.
    And I want to emphasize, as I have emphasized for many 
years, the need for HHS to comply with the Flores agreement and 
to provide legal services, health and education services, and 
post release services for these children.
    The Trump administration tried to turn HHS into an 
immigration enforcement agency. They separated children from 
their families. We need to do better. I am committed to working 
with you to ensure you have the resources to take care of these 
children, which includes housing them in State-licensed 
shelters that meet all the standards of care, placing them with 
sponsors as quickly and safely as possible.
    Mr. Secretary, we have made a lot of progress in recent 
months, but there is still much more to do. At a time when the 
COVID-19 pandemic has only exposed the already-serious failures 
in our public health system, it is time to be ambitious. It is 
time to meet the moment. It is time to do whatever it is that 
we can not only to put our country back on track, but also to 
build the infrastructure for the future and chart a better and 
a more equitable course forward for all Americans. And I and, I 
know, the committee looks forward to working with you over the 
next year and beyond, and we look forward to today's 
discussion.
    With that, I would like to recognize the ranking member of 
the subcommittee, Congressman Cole, for any opening remarks.
    Mr. Cole. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And before I begin my scripted remarks, I want to welcome 
our friend and our former colleague to this position, and I 
couldn't be more pleased, other than, of course, had there been 
a Republican Secretary. But that aside, the Secretary and I, 
Madam Chair, had the good fortune of serving together with our 
late colleague Sam Johnson for many years on the Smithsonian 
board.
    And as everybody on this panel knows, on both sides of the 
aisle, he is a person of unquestioned ability, a person of 
genuine integrity and decency. And while he certainly holds 
strong views, which I respect--some of which I agree with, some 
of which he knows I do not. When you serve together, you sort 
of know where everybody stands. But he has also got a 
practicing politician's fine sense of the possible. He was a 
great legislator when he was here.
    And so I can tell you, just from my experience on this 
committee, Mr. Secretary, whether it was under Democratic or 
Republican majorities or whether it were Democratic or 
Republican Secretaries, this committee has historically been 
very supportive of whoever the Secretary of HHS is. We know, as 
the chairwoman indicated, how vast your responsibilities are 
and how important they are to the American people.
    And I don't know if we could do this this time, probably 
not because I think your budget request is an ambitious budget 
request, which I applaud, quite frankly. But we have given 
Secretaries in the last two administrations more money than 
they asked for because we thought they had more problems maybe 
than they understood coming into these jobs. And again, as our 
chairwoman indicated, you are coming in at a challenging time.
    So I just want you to know up front we recognize that. We 
recognize that we know there will be areas we differ. I will 
mention some of those in my formal remarks. But again, I also 
know you are somebody we can work with and somebody that 
understands how we work.
    So I am very delighted that the President made the decision 
to choose you. And why you made the decision to leave a 
wonderful position in California and come back here, you will 
have to explain that to us over a drink sometime, but it is 
good to have you back.
    So with that, Mr. Secretary, I want to welcome you to your 
first hearing of our subcommittee. And I look forward to our 
hearing with you today and hope that we can meet in person at 
the next one.
    The Department of Health and Human Services has broad 
responsibilities covering almost every aspect of daily life. 
This is, indeed, a monumental responsibility that has been 
brought to life for everyone to see over the past year.
    I want to start by acknowledging the hard work and 
unwavering commitment of the employees of the Health and Human 
Services Department. Against nearly insurmountable odds, this 
agency has faced a global pandemic, and just over 1 year later, 
efforts of your agency have left our Nation well on the way to 
having every willing adult vaccinated. Yet another truly 
remarkable achievement for the United States.
    Despite the many challenges of the past year, I was proud 
to see Congress come together five times to pass emergency 
supplemental appropriations to help us through the pandemic. 
Our work together enabled us to create funding packages that 
everyone could be proud of. I am, therefore, disappointed that 
the majority has chosen thus far to abandon this bipartisan 
course in favor to pursue a partisan budget proposal, complete 
with lengthy liberal wish lists replete with items totally 
unrelated to the pandemic or public health.
    The President pledged an administration of unity, but 
sadly, it has begun with a legislative strategy of division. I 
certainly hope we can expect a return to an appropriations 
process that recognizes the role of bipartisanship, and I look 
forward to the release of the complete budget materials next 
month.
    Your agency oversees healthcare for our seniors and Native 
Americans and provides the foundation for core investments in 
public health and emergency preparedness. The National 
Institutes of Health provides the critical basic research 
leading to biomedical innovations, spawning new therapies, 
treatment, and medications for countless diseases. And the 
social supports under your purview enables those seeking mental 
health or substance abuse treatment to have qualified evidence-
based options available.
    The budget you put before us seeks to address numerous 
challenges--an opioid addiction epidemic, concerning levels of 
maternal mortality, a humanitarian crisis at the Southern 
border, and a clear need to prepare for the next pandemic. 
However, I disagree with the approach taken in the 
administration's overall budget request. To put it simply, it 
spends far too much on domestic programs, far too little on 
defense.
    With China and Russia building up their militaries and 
becoming increasingly more aggressive, America cannot afford to 
stand still or cut back on defense spending. At a minimum, we 
need to see a 3 to 5 percent annual increase beyond the rate of 
inflation for defense spending over the next several years. 
That may require some adjustments in domestic spending 
requests.
    Looking at the domestic programs, several of which are in 
this subcommittee, the budget proposal, like the most recent 
coronavirus relief package and infrastructure proposal, simply 
spends more than our Nation can afford. Moreover, much of the 
spending is not necessary. Our economic recovery is well 
underway, and many of the proposed program increases, while 
well intentioned, are not warranted on the scale requested.
    I do agree with the President that we need to invest more 
in the areas of public health and biomedical research. Indeed, 
in recent years, this subcommittee has spent more than either 
of the last two administrations requested in these areas, and I 
think the current pandemic has demonstrated the wisdom of that 
investment.
    To keep America safe and healthy, the United States needs 
to continue to increase funding for the National Institutes of 
Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and 
other related programs. And I note that you certainly made 
those proposals, Mr. Secretary, in your budget.
    We now have faced a pandemic in our lifetime. Let us use 
this lesson to leave future generations better prepared to 
address the next one. I firmly believe our investments in NIH 
over the past several years made us better positioned to 
address the challenges of coronavirus. We cannot let that 
commitment to sustain increases waver.
    Like our national security, American leadership in 
biomedical research cannot be compromised. I was disappointed 
to see no mention of the Biomedical Advanced Research 
Development Authority, or BARDA, in the budget released last 
week, but I would expect perhaps to see that when we see a 
fuller budget.
    The success of Operation Warp Speed to develop, produce, 
and distribute multiple safe, highly effective vaccine 
candidates in less than a year is unprecedented in medical 
history. Now more than at any other time, we need to ensure 
BARDA continues its key role in countermeasure development. Our 
country needs to be ready to respond to any event to protect 
the health of the Nation.
    In closing, I just wanted to mention one other important 
issue as it relates to this bill and your agency. For more than 
four decades across multiple administrations and Congresses led 
by both Democrats and Republicans, language has been included 
in the Labor, Health and Human Services appropriation bill that 
restricts Federal taxpayer funding for abortion under most 
circumstances. This provision reflects a time-tested balance of 
strongly held and differing perspectives on abortion in this 
country.
    Our bills have been able to advance year after year with 
bipartisan support with this balance in place. As such, I will 
strongly oppose any appropriations bill that seeks to weaken 
pro-life protections or eliminates Hyde policies, and I expect 
that under your leadership, HHS will continue to enforce those 
provisions of existing law.
    I look forward to our discussion today, and I thank you for 
coming before us. And again, it is a genuine pleasure to have 
you back and I think a good choice by the President of the 
United States to persuade you to come and serve again.
    So, welcome and look forward to hearing your remarks.
    The Chair. We thank the ranking member and join you in 
welcoming the Secretary. And many, many hours we spent at all 
kinds of meetings and leadership meetings, et cetera, and you 
with a deliberative purpose in focusing on how, in fact, we 
could use the institute of the Congress--the institution of the 
Congress to provide opportunity to people, to make sure that 
people all over this Nation get a better chance at a better 
life. And understanding that this is the place where it can get 
done and that the role of the Federal Government is imperative 
and especially at times of great crisis where the challenges 
are so overwhelming for the people of our country.
    So, delighted that you are here. I could not be more 
pleased and looking forward to a great working relationship.
    And with that, Mr. Secretary, you know that your full 
written testimony will be entered into the record. You are now 
recognized for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
    Thank you.
    Secretary Becerra. Madam Chairwoman, Chairwoman DeLauro, 
Ranking Member Cole, and to the members of the committee, it is 
a great pleasure, and I thank you for this opportunity to 
appear before you to discuss the President's fiscal year 2022 
discretionary HHS budget.
    I understand the 5-minute rule. I know you know the subject 
matter of this hearing so well. So let me try to be brief.
    The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated how health inequities 
and lack of Federal funding leave communities vulnerable to 
crises. Now more than ever, we must ensure that HHS has the 
resources to achieve its mission and protect the health of our 
communities. The budget that the President has put forward 
places our agency, HHS, in the right place to achieve that 
outcome.
    For HHS, the budget proposes $131,700,000,000 in 
discretionary budget authority, $119,500,000,000 of which is 
for activities funded by this subcommittee. This 
$25,000,000,000 increase from fiscal year 2021 discretionary 
appropriations underscores this administration's commitment to 
prepare the Nation for the next public health crisis, address 
racial disparities in healthcare, and invest in behavioral 
health, among other very important priorities.
    To start, the budget makes significant investments in our 
preparedness and response capabilities for the next public 
health crisis. It provides $905,000,000 for the Strategic 
National Stockpile, which has served a critical role in the 
COVID-19 response. It invests an additional $1,600,000,000 in 
CDC, the largest CDC fiscal year budget increase in almost two 
decades. With these 2022 investments, CDC will address 
preparedness within the United States and strengthen global 
health security.
    Additionally, the President's budget provides funding 
increases to address violence in our communities, $489,000,000 
to support and protect domestic violence survivors and 
$66,000,000 for victims of human trafficking and survivors of 
torture. Gun violence, very much a public health issue and one 
that disproportionately impacts communities of color, is 
addressed by doubling both the CDC and the National Institutes 
of Health funding levels for firearm violence prevention 
research.
    CDC will also receive $100,000,000 to start a new 
community-based violence intervention initiative to implement 
evidence-based community violence interventions at the local 
level. To ensure that HHS is equitably serving all Americans, 
the discretionary request does a number of things. It invests 
over $200,000,000 to reduce maternal mortality and morbidity, 
which excessively affects women of color.
    Two, it funds a range of rural healthcare programs and 
expands the pipeline of rural healthcare providers. It includes 
a $2,200,000,000 increase in advance appropriations for the 
Indian Health Service's program within HHS. And four, it 
increases funding for the HHS Office of Civil Rights by 24 
percent.
    The budget also provides $340,000,000 to the Title X Family 
Planning Program to improve access to vital reproductive and 
preventive health services and to advance gender equity.
    To help build the best possible future for our children, 
the budget provides $19,800,000,000 for the Department's early 
care and education programs, including $11,900,000,000 for Head 
Start and $7,400,000,000 for the childcare and development 
block grant. The budget invests in improvements to the child 
welfare system, particularly to address its racial inequity. It 
provides $100,000,000 to new competitive grants for States and 
localities to advance reforms that would reduce the 
overrepresentation of children and families of color and 
address the disparate experiences and outcomes for these 
families.
    The President's budget also takes action to address the 
epidemic of opioids and other substance abuse, investing 
$10,700,000,000 across HHS and increasing access to medications 
for opioid use disorder and expanding the behavioral health 
provider workforce, particularly in underserved areas. And in a 
historic investment, the budget provides $1,600,000,000 to the 
community mental health services block grant to respond to the 
systemic strain on our country's mental healthcare system.
    To support innovation in research, the budget increases 
funding for NIH by $9,000,000,000, $6,500,000,000 of which will 
go to establish the Advanced Research Projects Agency for 
Health, ARPA-H, with an initial focus on cancer and other 
diseases, such as diabetes and Alzheimer's. This major 
investment in Federal research and development will speed 
transformational innovation in health research and speed 
application and implementation of health breakthroughs.
    Finally, given the magnitude of HHS's work and the taxpayer 
dollars used to fund it, it is critical that we ensure our 
funds are used appropriately. This discretionary request 
invests in program integrity including efforts to combat fraud, 
waste, and abuse in Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance.
    I want to thank this committee for inviting me to discuss 
the President's 2022 HHS budget, and I want to thank the staff 
at HHS for their hard work in fighting COVID-19 and for the 
health of their fellow Americans. To build back a prosperous 
America, we need a healthy America, and President Biden's 
discretionary request builds on that vision.
    Thank you.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
    I am very, very excited. Before I ask my first question, 
let me just mention something.
    The 2022 budget blueprint is strong funding for public 
health, biomedical research, childcare, early learning, mental 
health, maternal health, so many other areas. And we all look 
forward to seeing the details of the President's budget next 
month and that role for Government that invests in a better 
future.
    There is one initiative that you mentioned that I am 
looking forward to learning about. It is your proposal to 
allocate $6,500,000,000 to establish, if you will, ARPA-H. It 
appears to be a novel approach in supporting innovation to 
address key problems in health and medical research, critical 
we strike a balance between this new approach and investments 
in basic research and fundamental discovery at the NIH.
    Once the full budget is released, this subcommittee will 
hold a hearing with the NIH, and we will all have a series of 
questions about the ARPA-H program. So I want to hold those 
questions at the moment until we get to the NIH hearing.
    Let me turn to another issue. Mr. Secretary, your budget 
includes $4,300,000,000 for the Office of Refugee Resettlement. 
I believe this reflects the administration's intention to 
restore the Nation's capacity to care for refugees, including 
the Unaccompanied Children Program, which we know is stressed 
right now. You inherited a broken immigration system. It will 
take time to fix it.
    You also inherited a record number of children fleeing 
traumatic circumstances in Central America, seeking refuge and 
asylum, and I know you are committed to doing what is right for 
these children. So a couple of questions here, Mr. Secretary.
    I repeatedly pushed HHS to focus on placing children with 
sponsors as quickly and safely as possible. I commend you for 
rescinding the previous administration's harmful memorandum of 
agreement with DHS, so sponsors are no longer afraid that they 
will be deported if they sponsor these children. What else are 
you doing to safely expedite placement of these children with 
their families?
    Secretary Becerra. Madam Chair, thank you for the question, 
and thank you for your comments about the work we are doing on 
this issue.
    There is nothing more important than children. And at HHS, 
we take very seriously our responsibility to not only provide 
the right care and health, but to make sure that we pass this 
child on to a responsible sponsor, these migrant children that 
we are encountering at the border. And so what we are doing is 
in that process of receiving that child from the Department of 
Homeland Security, Customs and Border Patrol, and until the 
point we can find a responsible sponsor for that child, we are 
providing the care that is required.
    Typically, that means offering that child a licensed care 
facility to be in temporarily until we find that sponsor and as 
that child is working through the immigration process to 
determine what will happen with regard to their status. While 
they are with us, we are hoping to provide them not only with 
the medical services that you would expect for any child, but 
also the care which would include educational, recreational 
services.
    With the influx of minors at the border, both ancillary 
services, education and recreational services become more 
taxing, more difficult, because the spaces that we are finding 
are fewer and fewer to be found. And so what we are trying to 
do is make sure we provide each and every child with every 
opportunity to receive not just the health and well-being care 
that we would expect for any child, but also the types of 
services that we would want to provide for any child as we pass 
them on to a sponsor.
    And we are working hard to move responsibly these children 
into care of a vetted sponsor. We have to be careful. We want 
to make sure we put them in the hands of someone who will be 
responsible, and we also want to make sure that we get them 
there as quickly as possible.
    The Chair. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Just a couple of other points in this area. I know we have 
set up emergency intake sites, and that is a new concept. And 
one of the issues is, is that because of the record number of 
children and the pandemic, that has reduced the capacity at 
State-licensed shelters. Where we had 13,000 beds, that was 
immediately cut to half or less than half because of the 
precautions.
    So at the intake sites and the precautions we are taking 
there, standards of care, and we have spoken about that, let me 
just emphasize that I have said for many years the need for HHS 
to comply with the Flores agreement so that the legal services, 
health, education services, post release services for the 
children are in order.
    Let me ask this one other question here. We have got so 
many kids arriving at the same time, I am concerned that 
children may have to wait for case managers while they are in 
the emergency intake sites. What is the plan to address the 
shortage of case managers at those intake sites and provider 
networks?
    Secretary Becerra. Well, Madam Chair, you characterized 
this properly. There has been an influx. We are finding that we 
are placing some of these children temporarily in these 
emergency sites. They still offer those basic services that we 
would expect for any child, and we are trying to increase the 
number of intake workers that can help process these children 
so that we can get them placed.
    You can imagine it is a task to make sure that we get 
people who are doing the proper vetting, the background checks 
of the sponsors, to get these kids placed. We do the medical 
check. We do everything we can to make sure that while they are 
in our care, they are--their healthcare needs are addressed. 
And when we pass them on to a responsible, vetted sponsor, that 
we are making sure that we understand that they will continue 
to get the care that they deserve.
    And so we have increased the number of intake workers that 
we have. We have actually called for volunteers throughout the 
Federal Government workforce to help us in this regard. We have 
been very fortunate. Several thousand Federal workers have 
stepped to the plate, and we are pushing really hard with our 
contractors that we typically are able to use to do this work 
to increase their capacity as well.
    And so everyone is trying to team up, but again, it is 
difficult. As you mentioned, when we came in, the 
infrastructure, the architecture to do this work had, in many 
ways, been dismantled. And so not only was the agency not 
equipped to deal with the previous upticks in numbers of kids, 
but to see the increased number made it almost impossible.
    The Chair. Thank you, and I apologize to my colleagues for 
going over time. And I just would just finally say I want to 
reiterate that we are willing to provide the necessary funding 
for this program. Like you, we want to ensure that the children 
have the services that they deserve, and I know that you are 
clear, as we are, that it is what we want to do is to move to 
State-licensed facilities for children as quickly as we can and 
to get them to a sponsor as quickly as we can.
    Thank you. And again, my apologies to my colleagues for 
running over the time.
    But Congressman Cole?
    Mr. Cole. Madam Chair, you are the chair of this 
subcommittee and the full committee. I don't think you have to 
apologize to anybody when you take some time.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Mr. Cole. Let me start, and this is actually prompted, Mr. 
Secretary--it is a little bit off script, but some things you 
said in your testimony that I want to agree with and offer you 
some thoughts on, and that was your advocacy for increase for 
the Indian Health Service.
    And we don't actually have jurisdiction over that. It is 
the one area of your Department we do not. That is with our 
good friends on the Interior Subcommittee. But you are spot on 
in terms of the need and the importance of forward funding 
those programs to protect them, just like we do the veterans 
program.
    I would just commend to you and this committee the 
challenge that they have over in the Natural Resources 
Department--excuse me, Subcommittee. It is simple. They just 
simply don't have enough money. This is the biggest part of 
their budget, and yet they have the National Park System, they 
have the EPA, they have a huge range. And of course, this is 
the most important part of our healthcare system that is funded 
solely by discretionary dollars.
    And so we need to look toward some way to get at least some 
mandatory funding. Perhaps similar to what we did a number of 
years ago with the community health centers, which used to be 
funded only by discretionary dollars when they started, and we 
moved to a combination. That has been renewed every time it has 
come up for renewal.
    So there is a jurisdictional problem here, which is a 
problem we have in Congress of not having this all in a single 
area. There is just a lot more discretionary dollars in this 
pot at Labor-H than there is at Interior. And then there is 
this idea that we are going to fund a major health program with 
solely appropriated dollars, which we don't do for anybody 
else.
    And the only reason why it is that way that I could figure 
out is just it was the first health program the Federal 
Government funded that existed before Medicare and Medicaid and 
the mandatory programs. And we sort of forgot about it and put 
it over to the side. I would love to have the opportunity on 
another occasion to talk to you and address this and find out 
ways we could work together. But I really appreciate the 
proposals that you put forward here.
    Let me move quickly now to BARDA and ask you some things 
that you may be able--I may be asking for an advance peek at 
your full budget. But as I mentioned in my opening remarks, I 
think that agency has done an important job. We also have the 
Infectious Disease Response Fund, something that the chairwoman 
and I worked on together to both establish, and she has really 
been fulsome in funding that.
    I am just curious about what your plans are in that regard.
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman Cole, first, on Indian 
Health Services, I will be making a call because I know your 
level of interest, your expertise on this subject matter. 
Indian Country is fully aware of your expertise and your 
support, and we will be discussing with Indian Country this 
issue of mandatory funding.
    And I appreciate your words because it will take a 
bipartisan effort to make sure we move it in the right 
direction to finally fulfill our trust responsibilities, our 
treaty responsibilities to Indian Country. So I very much look 
forward to working with you on that.
    On BARDA, I think we are on the same path. We recognize how 
important BARDA is to knowing how to get to the next level and 
to avoid these types of pandemics, doing the research and the 
development that is necessary. And so I will tell you that I 
will look forward to sitting with you to discuss that as well 
because BARDA is an agency which is pretty small compared to 
others, but it does a mighty lift every time it does something 
right. So I look forward to working with you on that.
    Mr. Cole. Well, very good. I will welcome that call, and 
again, I think we can make those efforts bipartisan.
    Let me ask you something on the Weldon clause. As you know, 
that basically means we don't force providers to provide 
services that are against their faith. This is, I know, a 
difficult question. It is a tricky question. But I am just 
curious, will you commit to the subcommittee particularly not 
to reduce the Conscience Division that we have in the Office of 
Civil Rights? That is actually where we protect people's 
ability to not be forced to render services that they don't 
believe in.
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman, as you stated yourself, 
some of these issues, while we agree on many paths to take on 
some of these issues, sometimes there are some disagreements. 
On this issue, where I can tell you that we can agree is that 
my responsibility is to follow the law, and you all will decide 
what that law will look like, whether it is to be 
appropriations measures or through legislation that you all 
pass. I can guarantee you that at HHS, we will follow the law.
    Where it comes to measures and where we will go where we 
have some discretion, what I can tell you is we will take input 
from all parties as we move forward, trying to make sure that 
we move forward at the executive or administrative level to 
make sure that we are responding to all concerns. But I can 
guarantee you this, Congressman, we will follow the law.
    Mr. Cole. Well, I know you will. I draw considerable 
comfort from that, and I know this is an area that we will 
disagree with. I mean, the chairwoman and I disagree on this 
area, but I really want to work to keep those disagreements in 
balance to where we could still have a bipartisan outcome and a 
bipartisan budget. And that is the danger here, and everybody 
around this table on whatever side of the issue knows that it 
is.
    So I look forward to our continuing discussion on that. But 
again, welcome. It is really good to have you in the position, 
and I know there are going to be a lot of areas we can 
cooperate.
    I take great pleasure in looking at your NIH budget, great 
pleasure in looking at your CDC budget. In those areas we 
agree--at least I agree very much with what you are trying to 
accomplish there. I think you have taken some of the hard 
lessons of the last year and responded to them very well, and 
replenishment of the Strategic Stockpile is another one where I 
think you are on the right track.
    So, with that, Madam Chair, I yield back and look forward 
to the rest of the hearing.
    The Chair. Thank you. And with that, let me recognize 
Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    And I want to say thank you Congresswoman Roybal-Allard for 
allowing Mrs. Watson Coleman to go before her, since the 
Congresswoman has a hearing I believe it is at 11:00 a.m.
    So, Congresswoman Watson Coleman, you are recognized.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman, 
and thank you to my colleague for yielding to me first.
    First of all, congratulations, Mr. Secretary. It is good to 
see you here. Yours is such an important agency when it comes 
to the health and well-being from our infants to our retiring 
adults, from the womb to the tomb, and I can't think of a 
better person that can head that agency.
    One of the important issues for me--well, actually, all of 
the issues that have been discussed already are important to 
me, but through the lens of equity and the disparities 
regarding minorities, particularly black and brown communities 
and women, I am very interested in knowing how we are going to 
accomplish the narrative that is throughout your budget, as 
well as with the President's presentations to us, when it comes 
to ensuring that everyone is treated with dignity and respect 
and the resources that are needed to ensure that are allocated 
appropriately.
    So I want to talk a little about maternal and infant 
mortality and morbidity because that is a huge issue, and there 
is a demonstrated disparity that negatively impacts black women 
in particular. My first lady, Tammy Murphy, under her 
leadership and her husband's leadership, has really been 
engaging actively in this whole issue and has assembled experts 
to deal with the issue and to recommend things like dealing 
with bias, implicit bias, ensuring there are more providers, et 
cetera.
    I want to invite you, either virtually or in person, to 
have a conversation with her, with me, of course, and with her 
team, so that you might know what we are doing and you might 
look at it as some best practices. Because I think that this is 
important. For me, all of the good intentions in the world are 
great, but I am really focusing on accountabilities and what is 
actually going to impact the well-being of the people that we 
are targeting. So, with regard to that, I wanted to just share 
that with you.
    The whole issue of mental health. I am telling you, this 
budget, it is very encouraging for me. It signals help is here. 
Help is more than just a concept. It is here. And I want to 
make sure that you have an understanding of what is on my mind.
    First of all, I did an emergency task force on black youth 
suicide and mental health because we saw that there was an 
uptick in that community, and a report resulted in that and 
some recommendations. And I need you to take a look at that and 
hopefully be able to support us in those recommendations, both 
in resources and in practice.
    The NIH has been talking to us and we have been talking to 
them because we are concerned that there has not been enough 
research in the area that impacts minorities in this situation. 
There has not been enough stakeholders discussions. There has 
not been enough people reviewing grants. And there has not been 
enough allocations of grant money to those issues that have 
been identified by people who are expert in the areas and have 
community relationships.
    So I would like very much to know if you had any 
discussions with NIH, if you know of anything that they are 
doing right now with regard to making sure that there is 
greater conversation among the various stakeholders and if we 
are going to be able to move forward in ensuring greater 
diversity in NIH, in the conversations that take place, and in 
the kind of review of grants and areas of grants.
    If you might want to comment?
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Watson Coleman, first, it 
is a pleasure to be here with you and take your questions and 
know again your spirit hasn't changed.
    So, absolutely. I look forward to working with you on all 
these things. I have had conversations with the various 
agencies within HHS. I made it very clear. Equity will permeate 
everything we do. And when it comes to NIH, whether it is the 
data, whether it is the studies and surveys, and whether it is 
the participation rates, we want to make sure that it is done 
in a way that incorporates everyone. We don't want to leave 
anyone out.
    And so I welcome your input, your participation. Look 
forward to hearing some of the thoughts that you have. We are 
putting more than $200,000,000 into this issue of maternal 
mortality, and it is especially high for black women and Alaska 
Native women as well. And so we are going to make sure that 
what we do is put resources behind what we say, and look 
forward to working with you.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. May I just say in closing that the 
Office of Civil Rights is so vitally important, and that is 
where we will look for the accountability. So I do look forward 
to subsequent conversations with you specifically, Mr. 
Secretary, regarding how are we going to hold the offices 
within your Department accountable in ensuring that the civil 
rights and the pursuit of equity is actually happening?
    And I thank you. I yield back.
    And Madam Chair and to the ranking member, thank you very 
much for allowing me to ask questions out of turn.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. And let me recognize now 
Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And welcome 
to the Secretary.
    First off, I do want to echo what the ranking member said 
about--and I am glad to hear that you are willing to enforce 
the law, as written, including the Church amendments, the 
Weldon amendment, ones that are, I think, very important 
conscience protection for our healthcare. And as a healthcare 
provider myself, something that I think is very important, to 
enforce those current laws.
    Let me just move on to surprise billing. One concern that 
is raised, we have passed the No Surprises Act, but there is 
concern among some of the stakeholders that stakeholder input 
may be bypassed by issuing an interim final rule instead of a 
proposed rule giving them time to comment. And so I would like 
to know if you could commit that you will give ample 
opportunities for stakeholders to participate in the rulemaking 
process by assuring that there will be a proposed rule with a 
60-day comment period on this?
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman Harris, coming from a 
background as the attorney general, where it was always 
important to take input whenever we would do rulemaking or 
whenever we would take any action, whether in court or 
otherwise, I can guarantee you that, at HHS, before we take any 
action, we will take the comments necessary, hear from all the 
stakeholders to make sure that what we are doing is based on 
the facts, the science, and the law. And I can guarantee you, 
sir, that you will find that we will have gone through a robust 
process to get there.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
    With regards to health security and the SNS, I am glad to 
see that the appropriations, the suggested budget is 
$905,000,000 for SNS, which is--and I want to thank the chair 
for supporting my amendment 2 years ago to bring it to that 
level. But there is an interesting statement in the budget 
proposal that implies that it is not just going to be simply 
stockpiling expired material, but that is not what the SNS ever 
did. It never was just about simply restocking expired 
material.
    So I take it that we are going to continue to look not only 
to restock what needs to be restocked among expired material, 
but then, of course, to expand into areas that we think are 
forward looking in terms of what we need to do according to the 
PHEMCE plans that have been put forward. Is that right?
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman, you are right. We are going 
to learn from our experiences with COVID and all the rest to 
move forward and be prepared.
    Mr. Harris. Okay. Yes, and obviously, renewing some of the 
stockpile is part of that, but I am sure that was just 
inarticulately written in the budget plan.
    Now I am just going to spend the last 2 minutes talking 
about NIH, and a concern I have, and I want to know what your 
vision is for ARPA-H. Because if it is a vision of merely doing 
advanced translational research, then NCATS should have done 
that. I mean, we already have the ability within NIH to do 
that. But that would move NIH further away from basic research, 
which I think is the main role of NIH. Because we know that 
other corporate entities, other businesses, they may do some of 
the non-basic research, but they are not going to do basic 
research.
    So is ARPA-H, what is your vision for what ARPA-H is going 
to be?
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman, we are trying to move 
beyond just the basic research to be able to have 
transformational results. And we have seen the clearest example 
is these vaccines for COVID. We have seen how quickly the 
private sector, working with the Government sector, can move. 
And so we want to be able to continue that basic research that 
has made America the place to go to when it comes to these 
discoveries, but we want to try to trigger transformation 
faster. Because that is what we need to do is be prepared.
    So what we have with ARPA-H is an opportunity to combine 
the best of what we already have, that basic research that no 
one else can compare to, and also then make it click. And so 
while ARPA-H is still fully in development, and the concept is 
there, what we think we can do is help make things click a lot 
faster by putting some additional money into that research and 
development that lets us get something from an idea to actually 
in practice.
    Mr. Harris. Well, Mr. Secretary, that is exactly my point. 
That is called translational science. We already have a center 
in NIH for that, and pointing specifically to vaccines, what 
made it possible with the mRNA vaccines is that we actually 
invested in the basic science research at NIH for over a 
decade. So, again, if it is just a new translational center, my 
feeling is it would just duplicate what we already have.
    So I would urge that basic science be an important part of 
an ARPA effort at NIH, and I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. I thank the gentleman, and with that, let me 
recognize Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. Mr. Secretary, it is so good to see you. 
Like other colleagues, I have had the privilege of serving with 
you not only in the House, but also in the California State 
legislature. And I want to join with comments made by others 
that we could not be better served than to have you as our 
Secretary of HHS.
    I would like to begin by thanking you and President Biden 
for including a request for $200,000,000 to fund a maternal 
mortality initiative because so much more needs to be done to 
address the maternal mortality crisis in this country, in which 
the hardest group of folks are black, Latino, American Indian, 
and Alaska Native communities. It also includes, as you know, 
mothers and babies also experience different outcomes based on 
where they live.
    There was a plan put together in recognition of the 
disparities in maternal health last December by the Surgeon 
General, and he issued a call to action to improve maternal 
health. And the Department of HHS rolled out the Healthy Women, 
Healthy Pregnancy, and Healthy Futures: Action Plan. And the 
plan outlines three specific targets to improve the Nation's 
maternal health outcomes by 2025.
    And they are to reduce the maternal mortality rate by 50 
percent, reduce low-risk Cesarean deliveries by 25 percent, and 
to achieve blood pressure control in 80 percent of women of 
reproductive age with hypertension. Is it your intention as 
Secretary of HHS to continue this work that was underway in the 
past administration?
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Roybal-Allard, thank you 
for the question.
    That is an easy one, of course. And you know so very well 
from knowing me for so many years that we think it is a 
priority. I know you think it is a priority. But my wife, if I 
were to go home, who is a maternal fetal medicine specialist, 
would not let me in the house if I didn't consider these 
priorities.
    So we are going to work these hard because it is important 
that not only are women allowed to live a healthy life after 
they have given birth, but that their children are allowed to 
grow up and be healthy as well.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. I have another hopefully easy question 
here, Mr. Secretary. Since the initial passage in 2008 of my 
Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act, it has helped ensure high-
quality diagnosis and lifesaving follow-up interventions for 
over 12,000 newborns diagnosed each year with genetic and 
endocrine conditions. And as you know, the Newborn Screening 
Act codified the Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in 
Newborns and Children to help address the vast discrepancies 
between the number and quality of State screening tests. 
Because of this committee's work, today 49 States and the 
District of Columbia screen for at least 31 of the 35 currently 
recommended core conditions.
    In September 2019, the reauthorization of the newborn 
screening law expired, and it is my hope that it will be 
reauthorized this Congress. Unfortunately, the previous 
administration suspended the activities of the advisory 
committee, which is preventing it from completing its work. As 
Secretary, you have the authority, which is reinforced in the 
2014 newborn screening reauthorization, to deem the advisory 
committee a secretarial advisory committee and to continue its 
charter.
    Given the essential role the advisory committee plays in 
our Nation's newborn screening system, will you use this 
authority, and when will you extend the term of the committee 
until reauthorization occurs?
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, I fully understand the 
value of that type of work that has to be done, and what I can 
tell you is that while a decision hasn't been made, I can get 
back to you as quickly as possible on the course of action that 
we will take administratively. But without a doubt, I think 
what we want to do is move forward, not step backwards.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. Okay. And I look forward to working with 
you on this because this committee, advisory committee, is 
absolutely essential in doing the work of protecting newborn 
babies.
    Secretary Becerra. I appreciate and agree.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. I yield back.
    The Chair. Congressman Fleischmann. Oh, let me ask 
Congresswoman Roybal-Allard, have you concluded?
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. I have. Thank you.
    The Chair. Okay, thank you. Congressman Fleischmann.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Secretary, congratulations, sir, on your appointment 
and confirmation. I wish you every success in your endeavors. 
And again, thank you for your service in the great People's 
House prior to this.
    I had hoped to actually speak with you personally before 
this, and I have got a constituent issue, major, that I would 
ask you to call me perhaps after this. But I wanted to delve in 
on some very important issues.
    There is a crisis at the border, sir, that includes an 
unprecedented number of unaccompanied minors. Once these 
children are on U.S. soil, we have a responsibility, sir, I 
think to treat them with compassion, regardless of their legal 
status.
    The administration is relocating these children to ORR 
facilities across the United States, one of which is actually 
located in my hometown of Chattanooga, Tennessee, and it is 
projected that HHS will need an additional 3,400 beds by 
September to prevent children from waiting in overcrowded 
Border Patrol stations.
    My first question, sir, is given the surge of unaccompanied 
minors and the lack of bed space due to COVID restrictions, 
what kind of funding levels do you anticipate are necessary in 
order to operate and maintain HHS detention facilities for the 
ORR program, sir?
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman, thank you for the question. 
A very important subject.
    Before I get to that, let me just make sure we connect at 
some point soon with regard to the issue that you mentioned.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, sir.
    Secretary Becerra. And I apologize that we haven't had an 
opportunity to connect earlier.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir.
    Secretary Becerra. On the issue of the unaccompanied 
migrant children, we are expanding our capacities as quickly as 
we safely can, and that is the operative word is ``safely.'' We 
are not going to jeopardize any child. We are not going to do 
things in a way that add to the trauma the child has already 
experienced.
    And it is a challenge because it is unlike adults and 
unlike any circumstance we have seen before. We have to do this 
right. We are going to make sure that, at HHS, when we have a 
responsibility, we do it as we are supposed to under the law.
    And our role is health and human services, and that is what 
we are going to do is provide health and human services to 
these children while they are temporarily in our possession. 
And we have continued to expand our bed capacity far beyond the 
capacity that existed even 3 months ago, far beyond the 
capacity that ever existed under any other administration.
    But we still have challenges, and the team is working 
really hard. The fact that several thousand of these kids are 
in our care, and they continue to be provided the kind of care 
that we would want to see for any child is a testament to the 
hard work being performed by the men and women at the 
Department of Health and Human Services.
    And we will try to keep you all informed because you are so 
essential. The type of resources we will need, far beyond what 
has been provided in the past. Our request is, I believe it was 
$3,400,000,000 for this coming fiscal year.
    We believe that if we are able to receive your support, the 
funding support, that we should be able to address this, again, 
as the law requires us to do it at HHS.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir. Thank you for your response.
    What steps has the administration taken to ensure 
transparency throughout the HHS contracting process, sir?
    Secretary Becerra. We will be reporting obviously to 
Congress on that activity. We are trying to make sure that all 
of our work is done with licensed facility operators. We are 
trying to make sure that when we operate a site that is more of 
an emergency site, that we are working with our local partners 
to make sure that the contracts are within the framework of 
what we have done in the past.
    I think what you will find is that you will have eyes into 
this. We have to respect, obviously, the privacy of children. 
They are minors. So access to facilities where they are, it is 
different from access for adults. But what we will make sure is 
that we operate in a very transparent manner.
    The most important thing we can do is make sure that you 
are apprised and the American people are apprised of what we 
are doing because, at the end of the day, what we want is for 
everyone to see, at HHS, we believe in our mission on health 
and human services for these children.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, sir. And consistent with that, 
I would ask that as we have situations like that in 
Chattanooga, that the administration be very transparent and 
let us know what is going on in our districts, whether we are 
in Chattanooga or anywhere in the United States.
    I know my time is running short, Mr. Secretary, and I just 
wanted to let you know that I plan to submit several questions 
for the record addressing CMS designations for EMS transport 
services, which is affecting a lot of our rural areas; a 190-
day cap on inpatient psychiatric services, which I think needs 
to be extended; COVID relief for assisted living facilities; 
and some other areas.
    But again, I thank you for your service. I wish you every 
success, and I look forward to hearing from you, sir.
    Secretary Becerra. Look forward to calling you soon.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Lee.
    Ms. Lee of California. Thank you very much. Good morning.
    First of all, Mr. Secretary, I have to associate myself 
with all of the remarks that have been made and 
congratulations. First of all, I think Congresswoman Roybal-
Allard and myself, we have had the privilege to call you 
assemblyman, we have had the privilege to call you Mr. Chair, 
Mr. Attorney General, and now Mr. Secretary. So it is always 
good to see you, and thank you for your leadership.
    I have several questions. So I will try to summarize these 
questions very quickly because this Department, which you are 
heading, is so critical to the survival, and not only survival, 
but young people especially thriving in this country. And so 
thank you so much for taking this on.
    A couple of things. I hope, and we sent a letter to 
reestablish the White House Office on National AIDS Policy. You 
know I have been working on HIV and AIDS forever, and so I am 
glad to see that the budget includes $670,000,000 for funding 
the End of the HIV Epidemic. And so I just want to be sure that 
the strategies that you employ in collaboration with other 
agencies will help us reach that goal of eradicating HIV and 
AIDS by 2030.
    And so as it relates to HIV and hepatitis in all 
populations, all geographic areas, you know that it 
disproportionately impacts people of color and people 
especially living in the South. So I want to know how you are 
going to prioritize efforts to improve health outcomes to help 
us achieve that goal.
    Secondly, with regard to public health, and I want to 
follow up with Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman's line of 
questioning as it relates to disparity. You know, I have 
legislation with Congresswoman Pressley and Senator Warren to 
declare racism as a public health issue. CDC now has embarked 
upon including many of the provisions of our bill in their 
declaration that racism is a public health issue.
    So as you look at disparities and equity, wanted to find 
out do you all have a lens of how we also dismantle those 
structures and those systems that are institutionalized and 
really present racist outcomes that show as it relates to the 
disparities that we have to address in many ways through your 
agency? So it is not only equity, but it is about disrupting 
those institutions that are the barriers to equity.
    And then I had the privilege to go Carrizo Springs and to 
El Paso with the delegation, and I wanted to follow up on the 
questions with regard to the children, and specifically with 
regard to those who were in the Customs and Border Patrol. In 
El Paso, of course, and everywhere we have been, we are told--
naturally, we know that our Border Patrol employees are there 
to patrol the border, not to take care of children. And so they 
were asking us for more help, more case managers so they can be 
freed up to do their job.
    So your overall plans, are we going to make sure that in 
the Customs and Border Patrol departments and agency that we 
hopefully transition in case managers to help relieve the 
burden?
    And if we have a second round, I will ask you my other 
question. So, so glad to see you.
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, always a joy to be able 
to chat with you and work with you on all the subjects that you 
mention. I am definitely looking forward to that and your 
guidance on how we move on some of these issues.
    And I think you sensed that we actually have a real chance 
to move on some of those first issues you discussed because we 
are putting real money behind some of these efforts. So I am 
looking forward to working with you on that.
    Let me spend a moment on Carrizo Springs and the 
unaccompanied minor migrant children. We have to remember that 
our mission is separate and apart and different from the 
Department of Homeland Security's mission. And in fact, we make 
sure that it is clear. Our role is to care for these kids. DHS 
and Customs and Border Patrol is in the mission and in the 
business of trying to protect the border.
    And so, within 72 hours, they are supposed to hand to us 
any child that they have so that that child gets the care that 
by law is required. That has become a challenge because of the 
numbers that have come through. I believe CBP and the 
Department of Homeland Security have done a remarkably good job 
of making sure that they are handing us a child who is ready 
for our care.
    But it has to be quicker, and that is where these case 
managers become important. But we have to make sure that it is 
clear that there are different roles that we play.
    And as you know from the laws, we have to make sure that we 
don't cross outside of our own lane. And so that is what makes 
it difficult at times, but we are trying to break down those 
bureaucratic barriers to make sure that our principal interest 
is the well-being of that child. And I want to thank Department 
of Homeland Security and Custom and Border Patrol officers and 
personnel for working with us to try to make that as smooth a 
transition as possible.
    It is still a work in progress, but again, our interest is 
the care of these kids.
    Ms. Lee of California. Okay. On second round, I will go 
back to the other questions.
    Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam 
Chair.
    So I wanted to follow up on some of the unaccompanied minor 
questions. What role, if any, do you, Mr. Secretary, have in 
facilitating migrant travel, including expenses, once 
individuals or families are released into the interior of this 
country?
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Herrera Beutler, great to 
see you again. Important question.
    We have authority to provide for transportation resources 
to make sure that these children are united, once we have 
identified a responsible sponsor, to make sure that the 
reuniting occurs as quickly as possible. So what we try to do 
is reserve our resources for the actual care, but we don't want 
to continue to see a child languish in our care if there is a 
responsible sponsor. So sometimes it is actually more efficient 
and cost effective to try to help make that transportation work 
so that the child is united as quickly as possible.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. On that piece, are you aware that the 
FBI vetting of sponsors for these kids has ceased in many cases 
as a result of the overwhelming caseload? Which I know your 
concern is these kids' care, as is mine. That is why I am 
asking this. And I have heard reports of kids being told--say 
you have family in New Jersey, they get sent to New Jersey, and 
then a trafficker there says you get to work off the cost of 
your fee. I mean, this makes me sick.
    So to hear that the FBI vetting is not actually always 
taking place means we could be helping traffic children. Am I 
way off here?
    Secretary Becerra. You have raised a really important, 
legitimate concern. But this is one of the--I am glad you 
mentioned this and asked the question because this is one of 
the issues that takes the time in trying to transfer this child 
into responsible sponsor hands. We have to make sure that that 
sponsor truly is responsible.
    There have been cases in the past, none of that I am aware 
of in the time that I have been Secretary, but there have been 
cases in the past where a child has ended up in the hands of 
someone who has either trafficked them for sex or for labor. 
And so what takes a while, and it is unfortunate because we 
would like to place these kids in responsible hands as quickly 
as possible.
    We have to verify, and we will do everything we can. We are 
working with all the agencies to help us do those background 
checks and verification. We will not let go of a child unless 
we have confirmation for our purposes under the law that we can 
let go of this child to responsible sponsors.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Can I ask does HHS confirm whether 
these kiddos are COVID negative before they are put on planes 
to travel across the country?
    Secretary Becerra. All these children are tested so we know 
what their status is on COVID-19. Now, remember, sometimes it 
can take up to 2 weeks before a diagnosis actually--I mean, a 
test can tell you whether or not it is accurate. But what we 
have always done is made sure that we test these children as 
quickly as we can once they are in our care.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you for that.
    Obviously, there are more questions there, but I wanted to 
transition a little bit and say thank you for your investment 
and leadership on both the maternal mortality issue, which I 
know my colleague Lucille Roybal-Allard mentioned, but also on 
the opioids and the mental health piece. Obviously, the 
pandemic had a large impact on mental health, and it has 
increased the use of drugs and alcohol, especially opioids.
    And in my home district, the rate of drug overdose deaths 
in Cowlitz County has increased by 43 percent in the first half 
of 2020. And for all of Washington State, there was a 38 
percent increase in drug overdose deaths in the first half of 
this year--or last year.
    So a synthetic opioid, fentanyl, played a very significant 
role in that statewide increase, and I just wanted to see how 
HHS is going to target--because you specifically focus on 
supporting populations with unique needs, people in rural 
areas, underserved, I wanted to see how you plan to target 
that.
    Secretary Becerra. Thank you for the question.
    I think we all agree that we have to really jump on this 
issue of the opioid addiction and, actually, substance misuse 
and the addiction that comes from it because we have seen how 
COVID has stressed everyone and actually made these 
circumstances even more difficult. And so we are making a major 
investment in addressing opioid and other substance use issues, 
and what I can tell you is this. We want to make sure we are 
targeting.
    I know from my work as a State AG that we are on the verge 
of reaching major settlements with a number of these opioid 
manufacturers to get monies for abatement purposes. We want to 
make sure at HHS that we are working with the State and local--
our local partners to make sure that we combine our monies with 
their monies to make it most effective. We are going to try to 
work with them the way they see fit to try to use their 
resources. Then what we are going to do is make sure we are 
concentrating on getting the kind of treatment that helps 
someone move off of these very addictive drugs.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you for that, Mr. Secretary.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Pocan.
    Mr. Pocan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Hello, Mr. Secretary. It is good to hear that. I remember 
the day you got the offer from the governor to become attorney 
general. I was sad to see you leave, but very glad you are back 
in Federal Government in a much more significant role. So, 
thank you.
    First of all, I just want to say you guys did an amazing 
job investing in people in this budget, the best CDC budget in 
20 years, investing in HIV and opioids, refugee resettlement, 
NIH research, on and on and on. Thank you for doing that.
    I have 4 things that I am going to--because you know how it 
goes in 5 minutes. I am going to ask my four questions and let 
you answer them as you know best.
    So, first of all, fetal tissue research banning. The last 
administration put a ban in place. This is something that is 
very important in my district, where we do a lot of research, 
the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I would be curious about 
the removal of the Federal restrictions imposed by the last 
administration on fetal tissue research.
    Second, also the last administration had discrimination, 
they allowed for discrimination with agencies' contracting. I 
would love to know if there is any plans for notification of 
non-enforcement and any new rulemaking to provide for 
nondiscrimination in HHS programs?
    Third area--I got four of these. I am going to go as fast 
as I can, Mr. Secretary. An issue around opioid and preventing 
opioid abuse. The former HHS a while back had proposed putting 
a plant that has helped an awful lot of people get off of 
opioids--it is called kratom--as a Schedule I. In the last 
administration, actually, the Assistant Secretary did the right 
thing. Admiral Giroir sent a letter to the DEA rescinding their 
view that it should be a Schedule I drug because recently 
within appropriations, we got money for research, and the 
research is coming through really well. It is helping people 
not just with opioids, but we have a very close family friend 
who uses it for another autoimmune disease.
    Would love to know that we are going to continue to do 
research and not try to push this into Schedule I. Love to know 
if you can continue that commitment.
    And then, finally, just curious on the Office of Refugee 
Resettlement, specifically on refugees coming in. I hear from a 
number of agencies that have had people that they were going to 
help relocate in my district, and I know the President was 
going to have an executive order to help improve the numbers 
coming in. And because that has not been signed yet, I am 
curious what is the status on that because I have one agency 
very aggressively asking me in my district about this issue, 
and I would love to be able to get back to them.
    Again, I am so glad you are Secretary, Secretary Becerra, 
and I look forward to working with you during this 
administration.
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman Pocan, it is great to see 
you again, and as usual, I am not going to have enough time to 
get to everything that you are championing. So let me try to do 
this. We will try to make sure we respond where I don't get to 
it.
    But let me on the fetal tissue research ban, we will be 
making an announcement, NIH will be making an announcement, I 
believe tomorrow. And so you want to keep your ears open for 
that. But we believe that we have to do the research that it 
takes to make sure that we are incorporating innovation and 
getting all of those types of treatments and therapies out 
there to the American people.
    On the whole issue of nondiscrimination, as you know, 
Congressman, from the work we did together, I am all about 
making sure we treat everyone fairly. And any time that we see 
signs of discrimination, we want to take action. And so we want 
to make sure that we are enforcing nondiscrimination laws, and 
I can commit to you that, as Secretary of HHS, I am going to be 
on that. On that, for sure.
    Opioids, I will have to get back to you on where we are on 
that issue. Let me put it to you this way. When you have got a 
President who is willing to commit over $10,000,000,000 in his 
fiscal budget to start tackling opioids, you know he is 
serious. And so we are not going to do anything that undermines 
our ability to really go after the scourge of opioids and what 
gets people caught up in this addiction.
    ORR, if you could frame again what the question was? I have 
already forgotten it.
    Mr. Pocan. Just the President was going to do an executive 
order so we could have a larger number of folks, refugees, 
coming in. We had people in my district agencies ready, and 
then people sell all their goods ready to come here, and now we 
are in a holding area.
    Secretary Becerra. Briefly, I can tell you that the plan is 
to increase the number of refugees we accept in this country to 
a number we haven't seen in number of years. And all of that 
will depend on what you all do to help us have the resources to 
be able to accommodate some of these folks who are fleeing from 
death, persecution, and violence.
    And so we look forward to working with you on that one.
    Mr. Pocan. Great. You did it. You are impressive, Mr. 
Secretary.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Congressman Moolenaar. Congressman Moolenaar.
    Mr. Moolenaar. Can't hear you. Oh, okay. That should be 
good.
    Well, good morning, Secretary Becerra, and congratulations. 
And welcome back in your new role, and I just wanted to 
highlight something.
    Recently, along with my colleagues in the Michigan 
delegation, we sent a bipartisan letter to President Biden 
requesting a surge in vaccine allocation to our State that is 
estimated to prevent 10,000 hospitalizations and save 1,200 
lives. I believe you may have also received a request from 
Governor Whitmer on this.
    And so far, as far as we can tell, that has not been 
granted. We do appreciate your efforts to send more 
therapeutics and boots on the ground. But I am wondering if you 
would consider a modification in the strategy and grant this 
vaccine request, given Michigan's situation right now?
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman Moolenaar, thank you for the 
question.
    And let me give you a sense, given the work that the 
administration has done--and I mean, I am even impressed at 
what President Biden has accomplished when it comes to the 
vaccine. When you can vaccinate more than 3 million Americans, 
as we go forward, I mean, most of us were wondering how many 
people we could get vaccinated in a day. But had someone said 
to you we could get 3 million Americans vaccinated in one day, 
I wouldn't have believed it.
    We hit 4 million, I think, over the weekend. And so it is 
impressive. The President has also made sure we have the supply 
we need to get shots in arms to 300 million Americans, 
essentially the adult population, by I think now pretty much 
every State is offering vaccination administration to every 
adult, not just those that were a particular age. And so we are 
moving in that direction.
    How we can address those States or those regions where 
there is a disturbing increase, that is something we can take a 
look at. We can work with you. What we have to make sure is 
that we don't get off the plan in making sure the vaccine is 
available everywhere where it is needed.
    As you can imagine, if we start to focus only in certain 
particular regions, we will start to have that disparate 
treatment of other regions. And so what we want to do is work 
with everyone to make them available. We work with the States 
and local governments to make sure that they handle some of 
that administration.
    We do have some sites that are federally operated to make 
sure we are reaching everyone. But we are always open to 
conversation about how to do this best and fast and making sure 
we incorporate all Americans. And so what I can say to you is 
we would be willing to chat with you more about this to make 
sure that as we move forward, every American will have access 
to that vaccine.
    Mr. Moolenaar. Well, thank you. And we look forward to 
working with you on this. I was concerned. I think the CDC had 
come out and said maybe Michigan should shut down again, and I 
just don't think that was a real viable option. But I do think 
increasing vaccines, increasing the therapeutics would be 
helpful. But appreciate your willingness to work with us on 
this.
    Also, just my district is predominantly rural, and one of 
the things during this COVID pandemic is we have seen the 
importance of telemedicine and the value in that. And I am 
wondering if, as Secretary, if you will be able to continue to 
allow flexibility and incorporation of telemedicine so that we 
can continue to grow that. Obviously, rural broadband is a huge 
issue in some of the rural areas, but I think some of the roles 
that you are going to be involved in in advancing telemedicine 
could be really critical in helping our rural communities.
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman, because you have touched on 
a really important point, I hope that you will be in touch on 
that matter. Because what we have learned from--especially from 
COVID is that telehealth has been a godsend. It has helped so 
many Americans have access to the kind of care that for them is 
difficult under normal circumstances, nearly impossible under 
COVID.
    And so we are going to try to apply all those good lessons 
moving forward beyond the pandemic on how we deal with 
telemedicine. And so you probably have some good thoughts. You 
probably have a lot of constituents who are stakeholders who 
have a lot of good ideas. We hope that you will reach out and 
provide some of that because, as we move forward, we want to 
make sure that we remove every barrier that we can from 
Americans accessing the kind of quality healthcare that they 
are entitled to.
    Mr. Moolenaar. Well, thank you. And just in closing, thank 
you again for being here.
    I would also like to add my voice to those who have 
expressed concern about repealing the Hyde Amendment. I do 
think this is something where when I consider how children are 
affected by abortion and including children of color, I think 
this is very much the wrong direction and hoping that we can 
work towards a bipartisan effort on this.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Clark.
    Ms. Clark. Oh, thank you, Madam Chair.
    And it is such a delight to have you, Secretary Becerra, 
and I associate myself with all the comments about how excited 
we are for your leadership and the incredible work that we can 
do together on behalf of the American people.
    And on a personal level, you were the first Member of 
Congress after I won my special election to invite me to 
Washington. So I am delighted to be here for your first 
appropriations hearing and just, really, welcome back. And we 
are so excited to have you.
    One of the issues that is so pressing for American people 
and especially for American women is the childcare crisis. We 
know that one out of four women have left the workforce since 
the pandemic specifically because they are not able to find 
care for their children.
    So as we look at a study from HHS in 2016 that said if we 
tripled the childcare development block grant from 2016 
numbers, which would be $8,000,000,000, we could bring 652,000 
women back into the workforce. Can you elaborate on how you see 
this connection, especially for low-income women, and how you 
view childcare as economic infrastructure?
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Clark, first, forgive me 
if I am smiling so much, but I feel like I am attending a 
family reunion and----
    [Laughter.]
    Ms. Clark. We do, too.
    Secretary Becerra [continuing]. It is nice to see so many 
familiar faces. I know how hard you all work, and even as I 
think Congressman Cole had mentioned, sometimes we are not 
going to agree. But there is a relationship you develop with 
colleagues, and I so much appreciate the chance to be back and 
to work with you. And even on those couple issues where we 
don't necessarily agree from the beginning.
    On the issue of childcare, the President is making a major 
investment in childcare, including that block grant for 
childcare, more than $7,000,000,000. He understands not only 
how important it is to care for kids. Look at the work he has 
done addressing migrant children at the border. Clearly, the 
work we are doing for kids here in America, he is on it.
    And what I will tell you is this. We are going to make sure 
that money is well used. We are going to work with you to 
partner and make sure that we have--we are doing everything we 
can to deal with the care that a child needs. Because at the 
end of the day, you hit on it. If we don't do this, the 
economic vitality of our country will never reach its pinnacle 
because so many women will be left with the inability to really 
just blossom within their careers.
    So not just for the kids, but for all those talented 
Americans who would be out there productively working, we have 
got to make sure childcare is taken care of.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you. And you mentioned the incredible 
investment that the administration has already helped us make 
through the American Rescue Plan. Can you tell us a little bit 
about how that distribution is going of that funding?
    Are there areas where we can be helpful in helping, making 
sure that funding gets to childcare providers efficiently? And 
are you concerned about the need for more discretionary CCDBG 
funding to offset a potential cliff after States exhaust that 
stabilization funding?
    Secretary Becerra. Yes, those cliff issues are always 
difficult, and that is where we are going to really need to 
partner with you to make sure we don't find families reaching 
that cliff. So I look forward to working with Congress to make 
sure that we continue to have some predictability, the 
certainty that families need on how they can budget forward and 
protect their children and be out there working.
    In terms of how the resources are being distributed, once 
again, we will need your help to make sure that we are doing 
this right. We are going to do a lot of oversight and 
accountability. But some of this money will go out based on 
formulas that determine where the kids are and how it goes out. 
Others will be based on grant funding, where applications are 
put in by different stakeholders who apply to provide services.
    But at the end of the day, and this is where I put on for a 
second my hat as a former attorney general, we expect 
accountability. We are going to bird dog this because it is so 
essential that we provide the oversight to make sure that those 
dollars reach the child.
    And so we will look forward to working with you in a 
partnership because I know you want to make sure that the 
monies you will allocate to us are well spent, and we all want 
to make sure that whether it is the child or the parent, that 
we have allowed them to be as prosperous and productive as 
possible.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Cline.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for appearing today.
    I wanted to circle back to the crisis at the border and in 
particular regarding the Unaccompanied Children Program under 
HHS supervision. You talked about accountability, and I think 
that this administration is abdicating its responsibility when 
it comes to not only making sure that our border is secure, but 
caring adequately for those who are coming across.
    Because of the rhetoric on immigration policies, we have 
seen spikes in illegal border crossings. Record numbers coming 
as a direct result of the changes in policies of this 
administration. So we have high numbers of children being 
placed in the Unaccompanied Children Program, a startling 
number of whom have tested positive for COVID-19 after being 
transferred out of border stations, sparking concerns of our 
cramped and overcrowded facilities that may allow the virus to 
spread.
    You have several facilities that are being operated, some 
of which are being--are in nonprofits. Other temporary 
accommodations. But for example, from March 1 to March 30, 
there was a total of 647 COVID-19 cases in 40 out of 50 Texas 
HHSC Office of Refugee Resettlement operations. These are self-
reported positive COVID-19 cases in migrant children in care.
    At the Carrizo Springs, Texas, facility for migrant 
children, 10 to 11 percent of kids tested positive for COVID-
19. There were 766 unaccompanied migrant minors stationed at 
the site, which had 952 beds at the time. I think what we are 
seeing is a failure by this administration and a failure by 
your agency to adequately care for these children and to 
prevent them from contracting COVID-19 and passing it on once 
they are released into the interior of this country.
    So I would like to hear from you what this administration 
is planning to do to ensure that people coming across this 
border, whether legally or illegally, do not have the 
coronavirus, and they are stopped at the border before they are 
entering this country illegally if they do to prevent Americans 
from contracting this deadly virus.
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman Cline, thank you for the 
question, and the spirit in which you asked the question, I 
appreciate that.
    I think, actually, I have heard from everyone the same 
thing. We all have the interest of these children at heart, and 
regardless of what their ultimate outcome is, whether they end 
up being sent back home or they are able to qualify to stay 
here, the concern that we have at HHS is that while they are in 
our care, we do it right. We do it under the law, and we 
provide that health and human service that they expect.
    So let me respond to some of the points that you make 
because it is important that we make sure when it comes to 
COVID that whether these kids or certainly anyone within the 
American family, that we are doing all to protect them.
    First, the reason you can cite those different numbers is 
because HHS is being transparent. We are not trying to hide 
anything. We want folks to know what we are doing, how we are 
doing it, and we want you to see it because it is important. We 
are not interested in hiding anything about the care for these 
kids. It is important for us that people see it. Because when 
you hide things, you are not doing it by law, and we are going 
to do everything by law.
    When it comes to COVID testing, as I mentioned previously, 
we test every one of these children. We do not release any 
child that has been tested--certainly we do not release a child 
who is COVID positive out into the community. We also provide 
care for kids who are COVID positive.
    We make sure that we don't have them comingling with kids 
who have tested negative, which, again, of course, is an 
additional responsibility and burden for us because it means 
less space. By the way, I should add here we are able to place 
fewer kids in licensed facilities today because of COVID. We 
have had to provide for the adequate spacing for children, and 
so the type of facilities that would have been available before 
to deal with the unaccompanied migrant children no longer 
available to those capacities.
    We are having to deal with fewer licensed beds, but more 
kids. And so you can see how it has become a challenge. But we 
are doing it, and we are doing it safely, protecting these kids 
and protecting the American public. And at the end of the day, 
our job is to protect and to offer care and to do it according 
to the law.
    Mr. Cline. Mr. Secretary, I only have a couple of seconds 
left. I just wanted to close, shift over to the issue of fetal 
tissue research. I hope you are going to continue the Trump 
administration policy, and that is going to be your 
announcement tomorrow.
    And then just one last question, Madam Chair, if I might? 
Do you consider the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision to be settled 
law?
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman, I believe that Roe v. Wade 
has given women the opportunity to exercise their rights under 
the Constitution and our laws to provide for their health, and 
I hope that we continue to see that Roe v. Wade was a 
compromise on how we can make sure that women, their rights are 
not violated when it comes to how they get their healthcare.
    Mr. Cline. But you would agree that it is settled law?
    Secretary Becerra. I have no question that Roe v. Wade is 
an important legal precedent that we must abide by that makes 
sure that women have access to the healthcare that they need 
and that they get to make the decisions on that healthcare.
    Mr. Cline. Because the reason I ask is because the Hyde 
Amendment was passed only 3 years later. So that should be 
considered settled law as well.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Frankel.
    Ms. Frankel. Hello. Okay, let me see if I see myself. Okay, 
here we go.
    Hello, Mr. Secretary. It is so nice to see you. 
Congratulations.
    I would like to just start with a couple of comments and 
then get to my questions. Just following up on Congresswoman 
Clark's discussion on daycare, the daycare industry is in 
crisis, and even before the pandemic, costs were too high for 
parents, and the pay was too low for workers. And now, with 
this pandemic, getting parents back to work, especially the 
women of this country, which have been--women workers have been 
hit very hard, just keeping in mind that parents cannot get 
back to work if they don't have safe, nurturing places for 
their children.
    And so it is so important that we consider childcare not 
only as advancing our children, but advancing jobs.
    As to the Hyde Amendment, to me, the Hyde Amendment is the 
ultimate form of discrimination against low-income women. I 
won't say anything more about that other than that. And as to 
Title X, thank you to the Biden administration for the new rule 
reversing Trump's what I call a suffocating gag rule that put 
so many women at risk, risk at not getting--many, over a 
million, million and a half couldn't even get basic primary 
care and putting women at risk for abortions in unsafe 
conditions, death related to pregnancy, and increased STDs. Not 
even being able to get a mammogram.
    Now to my question. The Affordable Care Act's birth control 
mandate ensures that women will have coverage for at least one 
of each type of birth control method approved by the FDA by 
requiring employer-sponsored plans to cover birth control 
without a copay. In May of 2017, President Trump issued an 
executive order which set the stage for expanding the use of 
religion to discriminate against people seeking reproductive 
care, and this allowed employers to deny birth control coverage 
to their employees by claiming in some instances vague 
religious or moral objections to certain methods of birth 
control. And I agree with those, and I will say the majority of 
people in this country, that the type of birth control that a 
woman uses should be her decision, not her employer's.
    Question. Will the Obama era rules that allow exceptions 
only for the houses of worship but still ensures women, that 
these employees could access contraception through their 
insurance company or a third-party administration be restored, 
and can you explain the reasoning?
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Frankel, great to be here 
with you, and thank you for always having that spirit and fire.
    But you are not going to like my answer here because I am 
recused from responding to questions on this subject because of 
my previous role as the attorney general in California, where I 
was involved in litigation on this very subject. So while I 
have a team at HHS who is working on these matters, I have to 
keep myself distanced from them because I had a role that was 
very obvious where I was as the attorney general for California 
on this matter.
    Forgive me.
    Ms. Frankel. Well, at least I thank you for being on the 
correct side of this issue, and just wish your folks the best 
in reversing this order.
    So let me get on to another subject quickly. Every day in 
the United States, 10,000 people turn 65, and the number of 
older adults are going to more than double over the next 
several decades. That is a lot.
    I read an article that said 70 percent of 65-year-olds will 
need some long-term support before they die, but they really 
have not done any planning. They think their kids are going to 
take care of them, or their grandchildren, which who knows if 
that is true. But if it is, it is going to take lots of people 
out of the workplace.
    So question is I see that there is a big request for home 
and community-based services to help older adults and 
individuals. Could you just tell us how this funding is going 
to be used and the Biden administration concept?
    Secretary Becerra. Absolutely. For those of us who are baby 
boomers, we see the value in having our Government believe that 
we have to continue that--or have that continuity of care. We 
are going to try to make sure--this President and this 
administration are making major investments to try to make sure 
that caregivers of some of our family members are able to stay 
where they are and make a living as well.
    And so whether it is providing $550,000,000 for home and 
community-based services, which is, by the way, an increase of 
about $158,000,000 over the previous fiscal year. We are making 
sure that we make those types of opportunities available to 
families. We want to make sure that older Americans continue to 
receive access to the nutrition that they have come to rely on 
when it is hard for them to afford it, and so we make 
additional investments in some of those nutrition programs for 
our seniors.
    And we continue to make every effort to try to make sure 
that everyone who is under the age of 65 and doesn't yet 
qualify for Medicare can qualify to have access to healthcare, 
whether it is through the Affordable Care Act's exchanges or 
perhaps through some of the proposals that the President is 
gearing up that would help a lot of our older Americans who are 
not yet Medicare eligible have access to the kind of care that 
they need.
    I could go into more details, but you and I know that the 
importance of Meals on Wheels for so many seniors, but it is 
also making sure that those caregivers that some of our older 
Americans rely on are actually able to do the work and afford 
to keep that as a living.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you.
    Thank you. I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Bustos.
    Mrs. Bustos. Mr. Secretary--yes. Yes, I am on.
    The Chair. Yes, Congresswoman Bustos.
    Mrs. Bustos. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And Mr. Secretary, it is so great to see you. I will echo 
the kind words of my colleagues and just how excited we are 
that you are serving in the Biden Cabinet. You are going to do 
remarkably well. We know that.
    Mr. Secretary, I would like to cover the Centers for 
Disease Control social determinants of health program, and I 
also want to throw out my thanks to Chairwoman DeLauro and also 
to Ranking Member Cole. With them, we have been able to stand 
up a $3,000,000 program that is based on legislation that we 
wrote out of my office called the Social Determinants 
Accelerator Act.
    And so the program provides grants to State and local 
governments to develop plans to combat social determinants of 
health like food deserts that we see in a congressional 
district like mine, long drive times to doctors that you see in 
very rural congressional districts. And they are negatively 
impacting health outcomes for people.
    I cannot tell you the level of excitement that I feel when 
President Biden announces a $153,000,000 request for the 
program this fiscal year. So, Mr. Secretary, a few questions.
    First of all, as part of last year's funding bill, we 
directed Health and Human Services to create a social 
determinants interagency council that would be made up of 
representatives from Health and Human Services, Education, 
Labor, and many others to help communities applying for these 
grants. If you could, do you know the status of the council as 
it stands right now?
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, great to be with you, and 
believe it or not, I don't. And I am going to admit that I 
don't, but I will check with my team because as I said to 
everyone beforehand, we are going to be on this one. And so I 
will get back to you quickly on that.
    Mrs. Bustos. Okay. Okay, we will wait to hear back from 
you, and it makes me feel good that you are committed to making 
sure that that gets up and running, if it hasn't already. But I 
don't know the status either. And because it is a bill that we 
wrote out of our office, very, very interested in knowing that.
    Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, you had me at hello on 
that one. [Laughter.]
    Mrs. Bustos. Okay. All right. Look forward to talking with 
you more about it.
    So when local communities, if you know the answer to this, 
if you know when local communities would be able to apply for 
the $3,000,000 worth of social determinants grants? I can tell 
you this. We have heard from many of our communities in the 
congressional district that I serve in central and western and 
northern Illinois about their interest in being able to apply 
for grants. Anything you can maybe let us know about that?
    Secretary Becerra. Yes, you are really getting granular on 
me, and as much as I did a lot of homework to prepare, I can't 
give you the answer on that, Congresswoman. But I can do this. 
I can make sure my team is taking notes and we get back to you 
as quickly as we can. Because although we have got a budget--we 
are talking over $130,000,000,000, $3,000,000 for a lot of 
communities is going to make a big difference. So we will get 
back to you on that.
    Mrs. Bustos. Absolutely. Okay. So let us then shift to kind 
of a bigger picture part of social determinants. With President 
Biden's announcement of $153,000,000 that he is requesting in 
his initial budget, how that would have the possibilities of 
assisting so many communities around the country. I am guessing 
you have been involved in those discussions with President 
Biden. Can you talk a little bit about how you envision that 
work? What are the next steps?
    What would you like to see happen with this $153,000,000? 
You probably even know how the $153,000,000 number came to be. 
But if you can talk a little bit about that from a bigger 
picture perspective?
    Secretary Becerra. And thank you for that.
    Let me give you a sense of how I hope to approach this. 
One, can't use a cookie-cutter. What works in one community may 
not work in another.
    Two, you have got to look at every corner because we often 
miss those corners where communities are trapped. And if you 
miss them, then you have really not dealt with the whole issue 
of healthcare and making sure that you are dealing with social 
determinants of health. So make sure you turned over every 
stone.
    Three, we are not going to know how to best do this from 
Washington, D.C. And so that means partnering with the local 
communities to ask them. Looking to the people who are 
respected and are the leaders in the community to help guide us 
on how we are going to do this work. Because they are going to 
know where we are lapsing, we are not doing as well as we 
should when it comes to addressing the social and healthcare 
needs of communities that have been left behind.
    And so working closely with partners at the local level, 
turning to respected leaders, making sure we don't assume that 
the communities in that corner of the region were hit, were 
already addressed, and making sure that we are doing this in a 
way that we partner with everyone who understand this, who are 
the experts. We should be able to come up with a good way to 
address this.
    And at the end of the day, as I said earlier to some other 
questions, to me, accountability is so important. I want to 
show that we delivered on our dollars, and I want to make sure 
that if someone gets that money, that they delivered on that 
dollar as well. The taxpayers deserve that.
    Mrs. Bustos. Well, again, Mr. Secretary, thank you so much 
for your commitment to this. I look very much forward to 
working with you, and I know you have gotten many invitations 
already but would love for you to come to our congressional 
district and see some of the struggles that so many families 
and individuals are going through as it pertains to access to 
healthcare and just some of the struggles.
    But thank you. Wonderful to see you.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Harder.
    Mr. Harder. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And thank you, Secretary Becerra, for coming before the 
committee. Given your deep knowledge of the State of 
California, I am really looking forward to working with you to 
make sure that all the Federal dollars we are talking about 
today come to areas of the State like my district in the 
Central Valley that are sometimes overlooked by Federal budgets 
like this one.
    Specifically, I think that COVID has exposed some of the 
cracks that have existed for a long time in our healthcare 
system. One of those is the providers, especially in rural 
areas like the Central Valley, when we had zero percent ICU bed 
capacity for many months in many parts of our State, it wasn't 
because we didn't have the physical bed capacity. It was 
because we didn't have the doctors, the nurses, the healthcare 
workers that were necessary to get people the care that they 
desperately needed.
    The American Rescue Plan that we passed a couple weeks ago 
had funding for 100,000 new public health workers, and I was 
hoping that you could give us an update on the hiring of those 
workers, the implementation timeline for putting those folks to 
work, and how you see that really supercharging some of the 
capacity needs that we have across our country.
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman Harder, great to see you on 
this committee and doing some great work.
    When the President sought to get those 100,000 public 
health workers out there, it was principally to make sure that 
on COVID, we were on it, and we wouldn't have a shortage of 
personnel to keep us from getting Americans the access to the 
testing and certainly now to the vaccines. And so, principally, 
right now the effort is to make sure that no community doesn't 
get the service they need when it comes to dealing with the 
pandemic because they have a shortage of personnel.
    And so how those 100,000 public health workers will be 
distributed will be based on the needs in those various 
communities. And we can discuss that with you as well. I know 
your district so well, as you know, and you are absolutely 
right. And there are other aspects to the American Rescue Plan 
that are going to help places like your district because 
whether it is the increased number of residency slots that are 
going to be available now to provide those newest doctors out 
there providing services, healthcare services through the 
training they are getting.
    Or in the case of your area, having UC Merced, which is a 
new university that is going to be able to provide access to a 
lot of different services to a lot of folks, and maybe in the 
future have a medical school and those kind of things.
    Those are the kinds of investments that we can make that I 
think at the Federal level we can partner with you and the 
local leaders there to make sure that we are servicing and not 
forgetting folks who live in the Central Valley of California.
    Mr. Harder. Absolutely. On the healthcare workers 
specifically, there was a note from the administration that 
there was a desire to make at least some of these workers a 
permanent improvement on the capacity of our public health 
system across the country. I didn't see a lot on that in the 
sort of blueprint of the budget. Is that something that you 
anticipate fleshing out, and can you give us any detail on how 
you would anticipate funding those public health workers going 
forward?
    Secretary Becerra. No question that many of these workers 
could easily become permanent and help many of our communities. 
I know a lot of areas in rural America would be desperate to 
have some of these folks become permanent workers in their 
areas.
    We quite honestly will have to partner with you because we 
would have to figure out a way to make sure that, working with 
our local leaders, we can make those positions permanent. And 
that takes money, and that takes Congress, and that takes the 
support and partnership of our leaders, State and local leaders 
to make that happen.
    Mr. Harder. Absolutely. One of the other challenges, moving 
beyond just the public health worker, we focused a lot on 
nurses and doctors. As you know and mentioned, the Central 
Valley has half the doctors per capita that the rest of the 
country has. I have been working a long time on trying to 
expand the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program to include 
California and Texas. It doesn't today.
    I know this is primarily a Department of Education issue, 
but it really does affect your agency and making sure that we 
have healthcare available to everybody across the country, 
would love your support to try to include California and Texas 
at long last into this program, which would lead to 10,000 
physicians coming just to our State in areas of need.
    But more broadly, is there anything else that we could be 
doing to accelerate some of the programs necessary to get 
physicians and nurses in areas like the Valley?
    Secretary Becerra. Congressman, if that is an open 
invitation for some suggestions, I think the most important 
thing is to make sure the local stakeholders don't wait until 
they hear that there is going to be money to let us know. Plant 
the seed now because I don't think most people believed that 
the American Rescue Plan would have been out there and been 
able to do so much good so quickly.
    And so plant the seed now with HHS. Let us know where there 
is a need, and we will try to work with those local communities 
to make sure that when we are ready to launch, we don't forget 
places like the Central Valley.
    Mr. Harder. Absolutely. Looking forward to working with 
you, and thanks so much for your leadership.
    Back to you, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Lawrence.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you so much. I join my colleagues in 
being so excited to see your leadership.
    I have a couple questions for you. I am so appreciative of 
the skinny budget and all that President Biden has done. 
President Biden has stated that we have a gun violence epidemic 
in this country, and we must address it. We are going through 
this very troubling time in dealing with violence from police, 
seeing so often that it is mental health that is needed, but 
the only response we have is a police officer pulling up and 
discharging a weapon.
    Can you please let me know how the Department will use 
increased funding to promote partnerships between mental health 
providers and law enforcement? We know that there are so many 
people who are in prisons right now who, instead of needing to 
be incarcerated, need mental health. And your Department is 
going to be very, very important in that role.
    And the other issue I would like for you to address, 
everyone has talked to you about the need for mental health. 
And as our children are being confronted with such a different 
reality that generations of children have never experienced, 
the number of suicide rates and everything has increased. So we 
must infuse in education a mental health component, and it is 
not optional, in my view, at this time. And I feel that you can 
be a leader in this and also provide it.
    My last point is everyone has talked to you about mental 
health. What are we doing to incentivize children or young 
people going into college to get degreed in mental health? 
Everywhere I go, they tell me there is a shortage of mental 
health professionals, and you can't just throw up a shingle and 
provide mental health. It must be through education.
    So those are my three issues, and I just want to tell you 
how excited I am for you to be in that role, and I look forward 
to working with you.
    [Pause.]
    Mrs. Lawrence. Are you there, Mr. Secretary?
    Secretary Becerra. There we go. Yes, how about now? I was 
just saying, Congresswoman, great to see you again, and thank 
you for the fight that you have always made on some of these 
issues. Let me try to respond quickly to them.
    Gun violence. We all know, what is it, about 40,000 
Americans die from firearm injuries as the result of our lack 
of action on this every year. It is the third-leading cause of 
death for Americans age 10 to 24, the third-leading cause of 
death.
    And so President Biden has made it very clear. This is a 
public health crisis, and we have to address it. That is why he 
has made sure that we are in our budget providing $100,000,000 
to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to start a 
new community-based violence intervention initiative that will 
work at the local level with stakeholders who want to deal with 
this gun violence crisis.
    We know that we need to do more with regard to domestic and 
gender-based violence. That is why he is making a major 
investment, close to $500,000,000, within our Administration 
for Children and Families to support and protect domestic 
violence survivors. We know that 1 in 4 women and, by the way, 
about 1 in 10 men have experienced contact sexual violence, 
physical violence, or stalking at some point.
    And so we are making real commitments because it is one 
thing to talk it. It is another thing to walk it. And I think 
the President made very clear we want to try to address these 
things.
    When it comes to mental health, Congresswoman, as you know, 
this is one of those areas where we have never, none of us have 
ever fully come through to match our words. And I think 
President Biden has made a major commitment here to start to 
fund the services that we need to deal with mental health 
conditions that a lot of Americans are suffering from, 
especially during this time of pandemic.
    And so I think you are going to find that this budget is 
more than just numbers. It is a statement on values by the 
President of the United States.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Do you have any plan on how we are going to 
get more mental health professionals so that we can meet the 
need that we know is going unaddressed right now?
    Secretary Becerra. I know that a lot of those current 
mental health professionals would say a more commensurate 
salary so that you can attract professionals into that work, 
and unfortunately, because we have lagged behind in treating 
mental health the way we treat physical and other customary 
health issues, we haven't seen the kind of investment that we 
would like. And so, hopefully, we can make that happen.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    We are coming to noon, Mr. Secretary, and I want to alert 
my colleagues that we really don't have time. We would all love 
to have a second round, but which we will be unable to do.
    But I just want to make a comment before I yield to the 
ranking member for any comments or question or closing before I 
close. But what an incredible discussion today, and that is 
testament to your commitment, your expertise, and your approach 
to dealing with difficult issues, the difficult issues we are 
facing today.
    I would also just say that we thank you for your clarity 
and also for your candor. If you can't answer a question, you 
can't. If you disagree on something or maybe potentially 
disagreeing is to lay that out. But it really has been really 
so forthright, Mr. Secretary, and the way in which hearings 
should go forth in this effort.
    And I also want to say at the same time to my colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle, I thank you for your--the expertise 
that you bring and the questions that you bring for what has 
been just an extraordinary exchange and done in a manner that 
befits the really very significant challenges that we face 
today and that we need to be wherever we are coming from or 
whatever our own disposition or interests that we can come 
together.
    I found in a book that I wrote 4 years ago when this 
country was formulating a social safety net, that it was 
crafted by legislators on both sides of the aisle, Democrats 
and Republicans, who understood the nature of the problems that 
we face today--that we faced then and the challenges. And 
whatever their political disposition, they came together and 
they forged agreement and legislation that has accrued to the 
benefit of the American people.
    And I know it is your hope, it is our hope that that is the 
same kind of ability that we can bring to the challenges that 
we all face today.
    And with that, let me just yield to my ranking member, 
Congressman Cole, for any comments or any further questions and 
to close, and then I will close.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And I want to associate myself with your remarks about the 
nature of the hearing we have had today, and I think that 
reflects, Mr. Secretary, partly a great deal of confidence in 
you on both sides of the aisle. We know who you are. We have 
had the opportunity to work with you.
    When we have differed, we have differed respectfully. But 
you are a person that has a gift for finding common ground 
without surrendering his principles, and I think that will 
serve you well.
    I hope, in listening to the committee, I love the 
Appropriations Committee. I mean, I really tell people I don't 
care if you are on the left or the right, the appropriators are 
deal makers in the end. That is not true of all of our members 
on other committees. They may be on the left or right, but they 
are what I like to call ``shirts and skins committee.'' You 
figure out pretty quickly where is everybody at, and the teams 
don't change, and the lines don't change. That is not 
necessarily true here.
    There is a great deal in your budget where we will find 
common ground. I applaud again the emphasis on NIH, CDC, 
certainly the discussion we had about--which is not something 
we will deal with on this subcommittee--the Indian Health 
Service and forward funding proposal. There is a lot there.
    And there is other areas where that we have shown we can 
work together in other parts of your Department, everything 
from early childhood and first generation college students. A 
lot of this is under your purview, and again, it is a broad 
swath of responsibility. So some under you, some not. But 
again, there is a lot here that we can find common ground on.
    And I appreciate the respectful manner in which we talked 
about Hyde, but I will be very clear there, and I don't do this 
in any kind of way to try and start a fight or whatever. But I 
do remember on one occasion on not the Hyde Amendment itself, 
it was actually another one of these life issues. And my friend 
the chairman and I were involved in negotiation with our 
friends in the Senate, and one of our good friends in the 
Senate, I had the Speaker at the time that was very much 
interested in this particular issue of this. I am going to 
leave them all unnamed.
    But my friend on the other side of the aisle in the other 
chamber said, ``Tom, you can have a deal or you can have a 
fight, but you can't have both.'' I thought that was a pretty 
wise saying. I actually took that back to the then-Speaker, 
reported it, and I said, ``What do you want?'' He thought for a 
minute, and he said, ``I think I want a deal.''
    And that is where we arrived. And 6 years in a row. I am 
very proud of this, by the way. Four years I was chairman. And 
when we got to the end of the day after the negotiations, my 
good friend, the then-ranking member, now chairman of this 
subcommittee and the full committee, voted for final passage 
because we worked toward a deal. In the 2 years that she has 
chaired this subcommittee, we ended up in the same place. I 
voted for final passage as well.
    And I would very much like to get to the point where I 
could do that again. And so the commitment I will make to you 
is I will work toward that end. But again, just as I understand 
there are positions that put my friends in awkward 
circumstances that they can't violate their principles, the 
same thing is true on our side. So I just say that to be 
mindful of it going forward.
    But I think you saw in your first session before this 
committee, it is a committee that wants to work together. The 
first thing I figured out when I was fortunate enough to chair 
and figured out the areas that was wanted. NIH was one of them. 
Early childhood was another one of them. First generation 
college students over in the education side was another one.
    Where were the areas they wanted? And I hope you noticed, 
because I certainly did, I thought all the questions by all our 
members were thoughtful and respectful and asked in a good 
spirit, and I think they are trying to figure out how they can 
work with you.
    I do think the range of responsibilities you have are 
exceptional. I sometimes think we ought to rename the--your 
title ought to be Secretary for Biodefense because that is a 
big part of your job. I look on what we do here as every bit as 
important in defending the American people as what is done over 
on the Department of Defense, and I sit on that subcommittee as 
well.
    And I think this pandemic has illustrated that like nothing 
else. Losing a half million plus people in a year is an 
indication of how critical the work that this agency does--or 
excuse me, this subcommittee does and your agency does for the 
American people. And so I take the responsibility like that. I 
don't see this as just a dollars and cents game, but I see 
these as programs that really protect the American people and 
are absolutely indispensable.
    And I also see them as programs that improve the quality 
and address some of the disparities that you and other members 
of this--you addressed in your remarks and other committee 
members on this subcommittee have dealt with for many, many 
years and worked hard. And we know there is a lot left to do.
    So I just end by welcoming you to your new position of 
responsibility and letting you know that the door is always 
open, that we want to work with you. We want you to be very, 
very successful in what you are doing, and I am quite certain 
that this subcommittee will try to find common ground with you 
and try to help you achieve some of the goals you have laid out 
that I think all of us, in a bipartisan sense, would agree are 
for the good of the country and in many cases for the good of 
humanity.
    Because, again, what some of the agencies you do obviously 
may impact on our country first and foremost, but this 
committee has the power, the subcommittee has the power to do 
good all over the world. I mean, some of the work that you will 
be doing at the CDC and NIH and cooperating with people around 
the world in terms of dealing with the pandemic are important 
for all of us and enrich the lives of all humanity.
    So I think you are well chosen and well positioned, and we 
look forward to working with you.
    With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. And I think we share sentiments on 
the Secretary and his knowledge and his goodwill, and I look 
forward to working with you as we go forward.
    Mr. Secretary, let me just make two points, and then I will 
close. I wanted to ask you for a commitment. I have serious 
concerns about the Strategic National Stockpile. I think we 
need to review the mission, the scale, the management, the 
transparency of this very, very, very important Federal asset. 
And I would like to have your commitment that you will task 
your team with beginning a rethinking of the Strategic National 
Stockpile so that we can move forward, and the American people 
can continue to have confidence in this asset.
    I say that because I asked over and over and over again in 
the last several years for an accounting because we 
appropriated serious, serious dollars, believing that this 
was--it really is a national asset, without any response, 
without knowing what was there or so forth and so on. So I 
would very much love to have your commitment on that effort.
    And the other point is with regard to the unaccompanied 
children, and I know that you are working in this direction, 
with regard to a long-term plan. And we want to move as quickly 
as we can to help these children, and the administration, I 
know, is developing that long-term strategy.
    And given your comments today that children who--ensure 
that those children in our custody are housed in State-licensed 
shelters, and they are treated with respect, and they are 
placed as quickly and safely as possible with sponsors. And I 
know that those are the values that you bring to this issue.
    And if I might just say that I am really pleased with the 
2022 budget for HHS. It includes strong funding increases for 
public health, biomedical research, childcare, early learning, 
mental health, maternal health, so many other areas. And for 
me, we are finally moving toward a budget and a role for 
Government that invests to give us a better future.
    We are moving toward a budget and a role for Government 
that elevates our education and our healthcare institutions so 
that ordinary citizens have the increasing prospect for 
success. And it tilts the playing field so that normal citizens 
have a better and a better shot at life and that parents 
understand that their children can get a better shot at the 
American dream.
    And above all, it says that poverty is unacceptable. It is 
unacceptable, and that we have, this institution and this 
committee, this subcommittee has the capacity to abolish it.
    Mr. Secretary, thank you for your testimony today. Thank 
you for who you are, and thank you for your public service.
    And with that, I am supposed to bang a gavel, which I do 
not have. So I will bang the phone. This hearing is adjourned.
    Thank you.
    [Questions and answers submitted for the reccord follow:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                           Tuesday, April 20, 2021.

   BUILDING CAPACITY, BUILDING COMMUNITY: INCREASING INVESTMENTS IN 
                           COMMUNITY COLLEGES

                               WITNESSES

WALTER BUMPHUS, PH.D., PRESIDENT AND CEO, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF 
    COMMUNITY COLLEGES
MARY ALICE MCCARTHY, PH.D., DIRECTOR, CENTER ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, 
    NEW AMERICA
WILLIAM T. BROWN, PH.D., CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, GATEWAY COMMUNITY 
    COLLEGE
KELLI JORDAN, DIRECTOR, IBM CAREER, SKILLS, AND PERFORMANCE
    The Chair. The hearing will come to order.
    As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few 
housekeeping matters. For today's meeting, the chair or staff 
designated by the chair may mute participants' microphones when 
they are not under recognition for the purposes of eliminating 
inadvertent background noise.
    Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves. 
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask if 
you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate 
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
    I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock 
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to 
the next member until the issue is resolved, and you will 
retain the balance of your time.
    You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how 
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will 
turn to yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the 
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When 
your time has expired, the clock will turn red, and I will 
begin to recognize the next member.
    In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the 
chair and ranking member. Then members present at the time the 
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of 
seniority and, finally, members not present at the time the 
hearing is called to order.
    Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have 
set up an email address to which members can send anything they 
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups. 
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
    With that, I would like to acknowledge Congressman Andy 
Harris, who is stepping in today for Ranking Member Cole, who 
is currently engaged with the Rules Committee. So I want to 
thank Congressman Harris and all of my colleagues for joining 
this morning.
    As we celebrate Community College Month, it is especially 
important for us to recognize how community colleges foster an 
educated populace and a highly skilled workforce and how they 
make college more affordable and more accessible for more 
Americans. Not everyone needs a 4-year degree, but everyone 
does need the education necessary to find good-paying jobs that 
provide economic security for themselves and their families. 
And compared to traditional 4-year colleges, community colleges 
provide a more cost-effective approach to education.
    Community colleges educate 41 percent of all undergraduate 
students in this Nation, and their student body is often more 
diverse, providing pathways to opportunity for traditionally 
underserved communities. Nationally, 27 percent of community 
college student identify as Hispanic, 13 percent identify as 
African American, 6 percent identify as Asian and Pacific 
Islander. Fifty-seven percent of community college students are 
women, while 15 percent of community college students are 
single parents, and 29 percent are first-generation students.
    Community colleges serve a broad array of students when 
considering age as well. The average age of community college 
students is 28, including 36 percent between the ages of 22 and 
39, and 8 percent over the age of 40. The majority of community 
college students also work while pursuing their credentials, 
and 33 percent receive Pell grants.
    While Federal funding makes up only 11 percent of community 
college revenue, these institutions rely on the programs and 
funding under the Labor-H bill--Pell grants, work study, 
Perkins, CTE, adult education, apprenticeship programs, 
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act grants, and the list 
goes on.
    From 2011 through 2014, we invested a total of 
$2,000,000,000 in community colleges through the Trade 
Adjustment Assistance and Community College and Career Training 
Grant Program, or TAACCCT. These programs help community 
colleges successfully partner with expanding economic sectors 
in their region to ensure a skilled workforce for high-growth 
local and regional industries.
    The investments go a long way, since community college 
education is drastically less expensive than a degree from a 4-
year college. And nationally, the average annual tuition and 
fees at community colleges during the 2021 academic year was 
just $3,770, and generally, anyone can enroll. By contrast, the 
average annual tuition and fees for a 4-year public college was 
$10,560, and the annual tuition and fees for a 4-year private 
college was $37,650, price tags that are usually accompanied by 
often strict enrollment requirements.
    In my home State of Connecticut, for example, the average 
in-State community college tuition is approximately $5,300 per 
year, compared to the $13,000 it costs per year for public 4-
year college and the almost $27,000 it costs a year for a 
private 4-year college in Connecticut.
    In my district around New Haven, we have three community 
colleges--Gateway in New Haven, from which Dr. Brown joins us 
this morning; Middlesex in Middletown, Connecticut; and 
Naugatuck Valley in Waterbury. I have worked extensively with 
all three colleges for years and have held my annual 
congressional arts competition at Gateway for the past few.
    I have seen firsthand the wonderful impact these 
institutions have on the lives and future of those that they 
serve, and I know that, as a nation, we owe it to our students 
to provide what President Lyndon Johnson once described as--and 
I quote--``the only valid passport out of poverty.'' That is 
why I have made it one of my top priorities in the Congress to 
fight for our Nation's community colleges, get them the robust 
funding and Federal support that they need.
    In fiscal year 2016, we worked to establish the 
Apprenticeship Grant Program, which helps connect businesses to 
workers with the skills necessary to fill jobs in a variety of 
industries. Proud to lead this subcommittee's efforts to create 
the Strengthening Community Colleges Training Grants Program to 
support workforce development at community colleges. We started 
the program 2 years ago, expanded it last year to $45,000,000, 
an increase of $5,000,000 above its initial year funding level.
    But despite the success of these and other programs, the 
COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on our Nation's 
community colleges and the students that they serve. Most 
students who attend community college do not have reliable 
computer equipment of their own or access to the Internet. 
Students often rely on the colleges' computer labs to access 
the technology, which make telecommuting or working remotely 
all but impossible in many cases.
    Moreover, many community college students who are working 
their way through college either lost their jobs, had their 
hours or incomes reduced, or found themselves working on the 
frontlines of the pandemic, putting themselves, their families, 
and their fellow students at risk. Already-existing challenges 
like food insecurity, inadequate access to transportation, a 
dearth of mental health services have only been further 
exacerbated by the pandemic and have often hit those who attend 
community colleges the hardest.
    Since the beginning of this pandemic, enrollment in 
community colleges has declined by 10 percent in the fall of 
2020, and early estimates for 2021--the 2021 spring term 
indicate enrollments will decline by another 9.5 percent. This 
decrease in enrollment has been much more pronounced for 
community colleges than other higher education institutions.
    This is all the more reason why community colleges need our 
help. We need to provide more than just increased funding. We 
must drill down into where exactly is the greatest need, work 
to identify programs, practices, and solutions that need the 
most support.
    This includes working to foster better partnerships between 
community colleges and businesses and emerging businesses and 
providing more resources to greatly expand and increase the 
registered apprenticeship program. This means more coordination 
between Federal programs and grants with these institutions and 
providing more wraparound services that are needed by so many 
of our nontraditional students.
    Finally, it means supporting students and navigating 
barriers, postsecondary programs, and credentials. The Biden 
administration has proposed making historic investments in our 
Nation's community colleges to provide cost-effective job 
training to workers dislocated by the COVID-19 pandemic and to 
equip future students with technical and occupational skills to 
succeed in what is an evolving labor market.
    So as we write the fiscal year 2022 appropriations bill, we 
must take stock of the strengths and the challenges of our 
community colleges and the potential they have to help develop 
our Nation's workforce and revitalize our economy in the wake 
of the pandemic. We need to invest in these institutions, build 
the architecture of the future at the Federal as well as local 
levels.
    Our community colleges are the backbone of our education 
system. It is crucial that we provide them and their students 
with the funding and the resources needed to build a brighter 
and a more prosperous future for all Americans.
    And with that, let me recognize Congressman Andy Harris for 
his opening remarks. Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the 
subcommittee, and our testifying witnesses. I look forward to 
our hearing today discussing the important role played by 
community colleges.
    The United States holds over $1,500,000,000,000 in student 
debt, with over 40 million borrowers. Students are graduating 
with tens of thousands of dollars of debt, or even hundreds of 
thousands of dollars of debt. We know this model is not serving 
students well.
    Community colleges can serve as an affordable, accessible 
alternative to a 4-year institution. Community colleges can 
save students anywhere from $5,000 to $20,000 or more each year 
in comparison to traditional 4-year universities. Several 
States also offer additional funding to make the cost of 
enrolling in community colleges extremely low, opening a door 
to higher education for many who would otherwise have been 
unable to participate.
    Community colleges were some of the first schools to offer 
enrollment options around a full-time working schedule, 
attracting new students and opening options to higher education 
to those who couldn't enroll in daytime classes. Roughly 60 
percent of all American community college students, in fact, 
study part time.
    In addition, the curricula at community colleges are 
designed for nontraditional students. These schools have been 
leaders in meeting students where they are and designing an 
education that fits the needs of the nontraditional student who 
may be a parent or someone who needs to work full time but 
wants to increase their skills for more job opportunities.
    Community colleges have proven they can adapt to a changing 
environment, meeting students where they are, working with 
local businesses to develop programs that lead to good-paying, 
sustainable jobs. As the cost of higher education skyrockets 
and the value of some 4-year college degrees decline, community 
colleges could prove to be an affordable alternative path to 
enhanced employment, particularly in fields in constant demand 
for more workers like cybersecurity, technology, and advanced 
manufacturing.
    In fact, two of my local community colleges in Cecil and 
Harford Counties in my district just announced an innovative 
alliance with other community colleges statewide that would 
allow students to earn their associate degree or certificate by 
completing coursework uniquely offered by another partnering 
community college. The participating alliance college indicates 
how their shared resources and expertise can help to generate 
cost savings that are passed on to students. By creating this 
pathway for students to easily move among colleges, they 
decrease the need to run specialized, costly, and sometimes 
low-enrolled programs at several locations.
    In Maryland, as across the Nation, community colleges are 
not just degree-seeking, but also play a vital role in 
occupational training and certificate programs. In my State, 
they provide training to over 100,000 students annually for 
occupational licensure and certificate training. In fact, of 
the over 500,000 Marylanders that attend a Maryland community 
college, 70 percent of them are in continuing education or 
workforce development courses.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on this 
topic and want to thank you, Madam Chair, for holding yet 
another very important hearing.
    I yield back the balance of my time.
    The Chair. Thank you very, very much.
    And so it gives me great pleasure now to introduce our 
witnesses and delighted to welcome Dr. Walter Bumphus, 
president and CEO of the American Association of Community 
Colleges; Dr. Mary Alice McCarthy, Director, Center on 
Education and Labor from New America; Dr. William T. Brown, the 
chief executive officer of Gateway Community College.
    And if you will just bear with me for a moment, I just 
would like to say and I am so excited to have Dr. Brown here. 
Gateway is in the heart of downtown New Haven, Connecticut, and 
Dr. Brown has served as a research laboratory director, a part-
time, full-time college faculty member, an elementary school 
counselor, consultant to schools, school districts, nonprofit 
organizations regarding issues of diversity, psychological 
health, and academic engagement and success.
    So I am so grateful to have your continued support, Dr. 
Brown, in helping to foster strong relationships between our 
community colleges and the Federal Government. So thank you for 
being here with us today.
    And also would like to introduce Ms. Kelli Jordan, 
Director, IBM Career, Skills, and Performance.
    Let me remind the witnesses that the entirety of their 
written testimony will be entered into the record, and I would 
now like to recognize for 5 minutes Dr. Bumphus. You are now 
recognized.
    And thank you very, very much for all the work that you 
have done and appreciate the strong relationships that we have 
had over the years in achieving your goal and achieving what is 
our goal with the subcommittee on behalf of community colleges. 
Dr. Bumphus.
    Mr. Bumphus. Good morning, Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking 
Member Harris and members of the subcommittee. I am Walter G. 
Bumphus, president and CEO of the American Association of 
Community Colleges, which represents the Nation's 1,044 
community colleges.
    I am, indeed, honored to be with you this morning to 
discuss community colleges and the Federal Government's 
essential role in supporting them and their students. I have 
had the privilege to serve as a community college leader 
through some very trying times, including leading the Louisiana 
Community and Technical College System during Hurricane 
Katrina. Never in recent history or in my 40-plus years in 
higher education has the country faced such a collective 
reckoning like the one that came with the COVID-19 pandemic.
    Almost everything changed. What did not change was the 
resolve, ingenuity, and commitment of our Nation's community 
colleges to continue to provide a pathway to a better life for 
millions of Americans.
    Community colleges enroll nearly 11 million students each 
year and promise access to educational opportunities. Many of 
our students are the same Americans most harshly impacted by 
the pandemic.
    Higher education is the pathway to a better life, better 
communities, and a better country. Our community colleges 
strive to level the playing field for all Americans to achieve 
their educational goals and stand ready to continue their role 
as catalysts for growing the Nation's workforce pipeline.
    Community colleges provide access to traditional higher 
education and the necessary skills training that allow students 
to enter the workforce, many of whom are then able to earn a 
family-sustaining wage. These pathways to education and to jobs 
were deeply impacted by the pandemic.
    As you know, our community college enrollment was impacted 
as well. Enrollments declined 10 points--10 percentage points 
this fall from the previous year. These numbers mean that more 
than 500,000 people are no longer pursuing higher education.
    It is disturbing to note that the declines were 
concentrated in black and Latino male populations. Colleges are 
working to identify and engage students that did not enroll in 
college or stopped attending during the pandemic and get them 
back on track to graduate.
    But there is a silver lining in the COVID cloud. As the 
pandemic has accelerated, the transformation of academic 
programs and services to ensure that students are well served 
in our ever-expanding digital world. Fortunately, the Higher 
Education Relief Fund has provided a lifeline to students and 
colleges trying to weather the pandemic. Our students and 
leaders cannot thank Congress enough for this support.
    Colleges are busily strategically developing and 
implementing HEERF spending plans. The Department of Education 
also deserves kudos for HEERF guidelines that provide and 
promote maximum flexibility.
    Community colleges have an ongoing partnership with the 
Federal Government to foster equity and excellence in 
education. I will highlight some of the most critical 
investments. Others are in my written statement.
    First and foremost is the Pell grant. AACC staff worked 
side by side with Senator Pell to develop the program in 1972, 
and we support sustained increases to this maximum grant. 
Roughly one-third of all community college students receive a 
Pell grant each year.
    With relatively low tuition, increases in the maximum Pell 
grant will generally cover nontuition expenses that plague our 
neediest students and hinder completion. Enhanced Pell grant 
funding would address some of the food and housing insecurity, 
childcare costs, and technology needs facing community college 
students and enable them to work less, borrow less, and focus 
more on their studies.
    The Strengthening Community College Training Program is a 
model for effective Federal support of community college job 
training. The program requires close collaboration with 
business, but allows grantees to prioritize regional needs.
    This program mirrors the extremely successful TAACCCT 
program. In 2020, the program received approximately 150 
applications and was only able to fund 11. AACC is thankful for 
the $45,000,000 appropriation in 2021, but we strongly urge the 
subcommittee to bring the SCCTG program to scale.
    Community colleges are enthusiastic about President Biden's 
proposed $12,000,000,000 for community college infrastructure 
in the American Jobs Plan. The increased sophistication of 
technical education requires continuous large-scale capital 
investments. We estimate immediate infrastructure needs to be 
around $60,000,000,000.
    The Strengthening Institutions Program helps low-resource 
colleges that serve percentages of needy students.
    Madam Chairwoman, we want to thank you especially for your 
support of SCCTG this morning. So thank you very much this 
morning.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you so much for your testimony.
    I now would like to recognize Dr. McCarthy. You are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Thank you.
    Ms. McCarthy. Thank you.
    Good morning. Thank you, Chair DeLauro and Ranking Member 
Cole and Congressman Harris, and thank you to all the members 
of the committee for the opportunity to speak with you today on 
this important topic of the need to invest in our country's 
community colleges.
    My name is Dr. Mary Alice McCarthy, and I direct the Center 
on Education and Labor at New America, a nonpartisan public 
policy thinktank in Washington, D.C.
    As Dr. Bumphus noted, and others have as well, the effects 
of the pandemic recession have not been evenly distributed. 
Low-wage workers, workers without a college degree, black and 
Latinx workers have borne the brunt of layoffs and reduced 
wages from this recession. And in striking contrast to previous 
recessions, this recession has led millions of students to 
either drop out of college or delay their plans to enroll, both 
of which could have lasting repercussions on their and our 
long-term economic prospects.
    Drop-out rates have been highest among our most 
economically vulnerable students, including first-generation, 
low-income, black and Hispanic, and adult students--all of whom 
make up a large share of community college enrollments.
    Now community colleges are accustomed to being on the 
frontline of recessions, and this time is no different. At the 
Center on Education and Labor, we have been conducting 
extensive research on community colleges, on how they can 
support an equitable economic recovery, and what we can learn 
from the last recession and how community colleges were part of 
that recovery.
    In 2019, we published a meta-analysis of the last large-
scale direct investment in community colleges, which has 
already been mentioned, the Trade Adjustment Assistance College 
and Career Training Grant Program, also referred to as TAACCCT, 
which was designed to build the capacity of community colleges 
to serve adult learners and workers displaced by the Great 
Recession. Through our analysis of outcomes data reported in 
the grant evaluations, we found that students who participated 
in TAACCCT-funded programs were significantly more likely to 
complete their programs and earn a credential than comparison 
students and, more importantly--or most importantly, had better 
employment and earnings outcomes than comparison students.
    So that is all a way of saying that by investing in the 
capacity of community colleges to serve the students and 
workers most affected by the recession, that generated positive 
outcomes for those students and workers. And that is why we 
believe the timing is right for another large-scale capacity-
building investment in community colleges.
    But it is not enough to just repeat what we did the last 
time. We need to build on what we learned and craft an even 
better investment that meets the specific challenges of this 
moment to get students back into school and to create pathways 
to economic security.
    In my written testimony, I outline four evidence-based 
interventions that colleges could implement that we believe 
would have a significant impact on student success, both in 
college and in the labor market. Specifically, a large-scale 
investment could expand--could help colleges expand student 
support services. We already know that providing a suite of 
student supports, from advising to emergency cash assistance, 
can make all the difference for students making it to the 
finish line.
    And that is likely to be especially true in the near 
future. As families recover from the pandemic, colleges will 
need help developing and upgrading these services.
    A large-scale investment could help colleges build more 
industry partnerships or sectoral partnerships, which have 
already been mentioned--thank you, Chair DeLauro--and which 
have already been highlighted in the Community College Training 
Grant investments. This is an evidence-based practice that 
comes out of the workforce development world and is highly 
effective for tightly linking skills training programs with 
good jobs.
    But it is expensive. It is expensive to get started, I 
should say. There are significant start-up costs. Colleges need 
help with those start-up costs.
    Also, apprenticeship has already come up. Investment in 
community colleges could help us significantly expand access to 
apprenticeship. It is the gold standard when it comes to 
connecting work and learning, and it also could make college 
significantly more affordable. Expanding apprenticeship into 
industries like information technology, healthcare, and 
business services is possible. Community colleges are the right 
institution to do this, but again, there are high start-up 
costs, and they will need resources to do it.
    And then, finally, I think we all know that colleges have a 
real need to improve online learning. It is hard to imagine a 
time when colleges were better positioned to make good 
investments in technology to support online learning.
    It has been a year of sort of a crash course on how to 
deliver high-quality online learning. Enabling colleges to 
build on what has worked and perhaps replace what hasn't would 
be a very good way to put all those hard-learned lessons of the 
last year to use.
    I think it is worth noting--and I will leave you with one 
last request, which is that we are very concerned about 
students needing--who won't go back to school because they need 
to work. We have a Federal Work Study Program that we believe 
we are underleveraging. We think we could add money to the 
Federal Work Study Program specifically dedicated to community 
college students, an extra formula within that, and I am happy 
to talk more about that in the question and answer period.
    And again, thank you very much for your time.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you so much for your testimony.
    I would now like to recognize Dr. Brown. You are recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Brown. Andy Harris and to all the members serving on 
this subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations, 
thank you for this opportunity to testify before you today.
    I am Dr. William Brown, and I serve as the chief executive 
officer for Gateway Community College, headquartered in the 
heart of downtown New Haven, Connecticut. Gateway is the 
largest community college in Connecticut and home to over 90 
associate degree and certificate programs and dozens more 
workforce and continuing education programs.
    This academic year, more than 8,600 students enrolled in 
credit courses at Gateway, and more than 600 students enrolled 
in our noncredit workforce programs. Gateway's student body is 
diverse. The majority of our students are African American and 
Hispanic Latinx, and Gateway has been designated as a Hispanic-
serving institution since 2018.
    More than 40 percent of our students are 25 years of age or 
older. Most of our students are challenged economically. Almost 
6 in 10 students receive some form of financial aid, and 45 
percent are eligible for Pell grants. Almost 7 in 10 of our 
students attend Gateway part time.
    Our students are attending college full time when they can, 
part time when they must, while facing many life challenges 
that too often get in the way of them attending and completing 
college, including unemployment, underemployment, food 
insecurity, lack of reliable transportation, inadequate 
childcare, the digital divide, and unmet needs for healthcare 
and mental health services.
    The fact is that the COVID pandemic has aggravated every 
single one of our students' challenges and laid bare all of 
their vulnerabilities.
    Over the last several years, Gateway has extended its 
supports for our students by directly providing wraparound 
services, and these programs have been extremely successful in 
helping them succeed in their programs. I am especially 
gratified with how employers, community partners, and private 
philanthropy, from Yale University and Yale New Haven Health to 
our own Gateway Community College Foundation, have rallied 
around and partnered with Gateway to provide critical supports 
and services for our students.
    Despite all the challenges, our students have powerful 
stories of resilience and dedication, and I detail some of 
those in my written testimony. And their successes are a 
testament to what can be accomplished when ambition, hard work, 
and unrelenting perseverance meet with a challenging 
educational environment and a supportive community.
    Honorable Representatives, we truly appreciate your support 
to Gateway and to our students. HEERF funding has enabled us to 
keep our campus safe, preserved our courses and services, and 
provided critical financial support to our students during this 
devastating pandemic.
    We have used funding from the Childcare Access Means 
Parents in School, the CCAMPIS grant, to expand childcare 
available at Gateway into the evening. Gateway is receiving 
funding through the Strengthening Community Colleges Training 
Grant, enabling us to develop and expand critical healthcare 
programs and train the workforce that will assist with our 
region's recovery from the pandemic.
    We encourage you to continue making the investments 
necessary to support our students to expand your support for 
established programs like Pell, GEAR UP, TRIO, and Perkins and 
to seize the promise of newer programs like the Strengthening 
Community Colleges Training Grant. Any and all funding policies 
and regulations that support students and their families caring 
for and educating themselves, meeting childcare, healthcare, 
and transportation needs will have a tremendous impact on their 
prospects for a brighter future.
    Representative DeLauro has been a longtime champion for 
Gateway, and she and members of the Connecticut delegation 
regularly visit our beautiful campus. Gateway is always happy 
to host any member of this committee, and we invite you to come 
and see our work firsthand and how your investments have 
impacted our amazing students.
    If you come, we will also offer you the opportunity to 
support small business and enjoy some of our legendary New 
Haven pizza.
    On behalf of Gateway Community College and community 
colleges across the Nation, thank you again for this 
opportunity to address you.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you so much, Dr. Brown. I would very much 
like to get the committee to New Haven to see Gateway and to 
enjoy really which is the very best pizza in the entire 
country. So, bar none. So thank you very much.
    Ms. Jordan, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Jordan. Good morning, Chair DeLauro, Ranking Member 
Cole, Congressman Harris, and distinguished members.
    My name is Kelli Jordan, and I am IBM's director of career, 
skills, and performance. I manage talent programs at IBM that 
empower IBMers to build skills and have fulfilling careers. I 
am honored to speak today at this hearing on the essential role 
of community colleges.
    IBM knows that quality education on in-demand skills opens 
doors to good jobs and better pay. Today, education in career-
line skills is not sufficiently available to meet the needs of 
businesses or job-seeking Americans. Additional, more 
accessible skills pathways, such as those offered by community 
colleges, are key to helping more people, particularly those in 
underserved communities, get on course for better jobs.
    As this committee explores increasing investment in U.S. 
community colleges, I offer three suggestions for ensuring that 
those investments help our country build back a more equitable 
economy.
    First, expand job-related skills education in high school 
through community college partnerships. Fostering partnerships 
between community colleges and high schools can help students 
build relevant skills early, while preparing them to easily 
transition to a career or further education immediately upon 
graduation, all while minimizing costs to students.
    IBM has experienced the power of these partnerships 
firsthand. Ten years ago, IBM launched Pathways in Technology 
Early College High Schools, P-TECH, a 21st century approach to 
high school career education. It combines traditional high 
school courses with a no-cost associate's degree, hands-on 
professional mentoring, and a real workplace experience.
    P-TECH has proven so successful that it has expanded to 162 
P-TECH schools in the U.S., including Connecticut, Maryland, 
Texas, and California, among others. Increasing funding through 
existing authorizations to promote more P-TECH-style 
partnerships between community colleges and high schools would 
expand the acquisition of in-demand skills, promote a more 
inclusive workforce, and reduce barriers to well-paying 
careers.
    Second, make skills education more widely available at all 
stages of life. Collaboration with community colleges has been 
the foundation for many IBM initiatives to prepare students and 
workers for ``new collar'' jobs, where in-demand skills matter 
more than a specific degree.
    In 2017, IBM launched our New Collar Apprenticeship 
Program, focused on fast-growing fields, such as cybersecurity, 
cloud computing, and more. This ``earn while you learn'' 
program includes robust learning content, coupled with hands-on 
experience and was so successful that it grew twice as fast as 
expected in the first year.
    As IBM has testified previously, funding for 
apprenticeships is shockingly low for a pathway that can be an 
economic gamechanger for both students and mid-career 
professionals. Funding for U.S. Department of Labor 
apprenticeships should be increased, and community colleges 
should play a central role in these programs nationwide.
    Third, improve the infrastructure for sharing credentials. 
Today, there is simply no good or easy way for job seekers to 
share their skills and credentials with prospective employers. 
Establishing a national skills infrastructure would streamline 
the process by which students and workers share verified 
skills, certifications, and degrees. It would also empower 
learners to align their skills with in-demand jobs.
    IBM has joined with other institutions to pilot a skills 
exchange infrastructure that utilizes blockchain technology to 
protect individual privacy and ensure that a job seeker or 
student retains full control over their personal information. 
This pilot is a first step, but greater support for technical 
infrastructure is required to create a learning and employment 
credentials exchange that is accessible to all Americans. The 
Appropriations Committee should include resources for 
educational institutions and workforce boards to join this 
exchange.
    At IBM, we believe this era of technology must be an 
inclusive one. This can only happen if more people can acquire 
the skills needed for the jobs that are made possible by 
breakthrough innovations like AI and quantum computing. 
Community colleges have proven through their flexibility, 
reach, and willingness to partner in innovative ways that they 
can be catalysts for more inclusive approaches to skills and 
education.
    We applaud the committee for focusing on the vital role of 
these invaluable institutions, and I thank you again for the 
opportunity to testify. I look forward to answering any 
questions.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you so much. We thank all of our witnesses 
for their testimony.
    And if I may, just before I begin my own questions, it is 
really rewarding to listen to the four of you, who have so much 
experience in this area of community colleges and the 
partnerships that are critical to really increasing educational 
opportunity. And what struck me again, which has in several of 
our other hearings this year, is the consistency of message, if 
you will, from all of you, which is the essential role that 
community colleges play--their strength, the pandemic effects, 
the need for serious investment, the need to create the 
business partnerships.
    And so we are going to look forward to all of you being 
able to provide us with recommendations as we move forward with 
the appropriations process. So thank you all very, very much.
    Let me ask my first question to Dr. Brown. Dr. Brown, 
earlier this year, the Department of Labor awarded a first 
round of grants under the Strengthening Community Colleges 
Training Grants Program. Gateway received a grant under this 
program in partnership with other local community colleges. One 
of the goals is to support those partnerships between community 
colleges and expanding economic sectors in the region.
    Now just my question is, what type of education and 
training programs and resulting careers will be available as a 
result of this grant? Who are your partners? How did you choose 
the healthcare industry as a focal point for your grant?
    Dr. Brown, can you unmute?
    Mr. Brown. I apologize for that. So with regards to the 
careers that are available, we have designed our program, which 
is entitled CT SHIP--Connecticut Statewide Healthcare 
Industries Pathways--so that students who are interested in 
programs of CNA, certified nursing assistant; patient care 
technician, medical office assistant, those kinds of programs--
medical coding--that they would be able to be trained in those 
programs.
    And what is nice about those is that they are also set up 
to lead to other programs, other jobs in healthcare. So, for 
example, we are also using the grant to support a central 
sterile processing program, and those kinds of programs can 
lead to surgical tech and beyond. So those are some of the 
programs that would be supported by the grant.
    In terms of partners, as you mentioned, we are partnered 
with Norwalk Community College, Housatonic Community College in 
Bridgeport, Middlesex Community College, and Tunxis Community 
College in Connecticut. And along with our fellow community 
colleges, the Connecticut Department of Labor, the Department 
of Economic and Community Development, our workforce 
development boards are all working with us. And the employers 
that we are partnered with include Yale New Haven Health, 
Hartford Healthcare, Norwalk Hospital, and Stamford Health.
    So we have a very broad partnership with business and 
industry, with the State, as well with the Federal Government.
    How did we choose healthcare? The focus of the grant is on 
displaced workers, workers who have been displaced by the COVID 
pandemic. We are also very, very interested in addressing 
disparities in postsecondary training. And with healthcare, we 
were already, as a State, like many other places, suffering 
from a shortage of healthcare workers. The pandemic has 
aggravated that entire situation.
    And so this is really investing in it would be nice to say 
the workforce for tomorrow, but we are really talking about the 
workforce for today. There is such a need for healthcare 
workers at all different levels that this--it just made sense 
to invest in those particular areas.
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very much.
    Let me ask, if I can, Dr. McCarthy and Dr. Bumphus, this is 
about the TAACCCT grant. You said it was--Dr. McCarthy, you 
said it was successful in helping students finish a program, 
earn a credential, secure employment. As we continue to grow 
the Strengthening Community Colleges Training Program, which is 
its successor, how can we make the program more effective?
    And I am going to ask Dr. Bumphus--because my time is going 
to run out here--in your testimony, you talk about the 
overwhelming response from the colleges to the Strengthening 
Community Colleges Training Grant.
    I am going to ask Dr. McCarthy for her recommendations and 
then ask you, Dr. Bumphus, if you have any additional 
recommendations as how do we maximize the partnerships between 
the colleges and high-growth economic sectors.
    Ms. McCarthy. Thank you, Chair DeLauro.
    I would have three recommendations for building on 
Strengthening Community Colleges Training Grants Program, which 
is an excellent investment and has also built on previous 
lessons. What I would say is that I think the program, given 
the situation that we are in, needs to be much larger. It is 
just there needs to be more researchers out there.
    The TAACCCT program was $2,000,000,000, and I don't even 
think that came close enough to the kind of--and it touched 
almost--it touched almost every State, and it touched a large 
share of community colleges. And that is what we need as we are 
moving out of the pandemic is every community college in the 
country needs some capacity-building dollars, and this would be 
a good vehicle for doing that.
    The other two things I would add to the Strengthening 
Community Colleges Career Training Grants Program would be to 
include a role for the State, a set-aside for the State 
agencies. One of our findings in our research of the TAACCCT 
grants was that there were a lot of really exciting innovations 
that never got lifted up that could have been sustained and 
scaled through State policies.
    Colorado did this with the TAACCCT Innovation Drug 
Developmental Education that the community colleges developed, 
but we didn't see that in any other State. It is a real missed 
opportunity.
    Our community colleges are often boutiques or islands of 
innovation and excellence. This investment should be a way--the 
States could be a way to get out of it.
    And then, similarly, we would like to see a more sort of 
cross-agency--structured cross-agency collaboration between the 
Departments of Education and Labor. These programs are about 
helping community college students move from college into the 
labor market successfully.
    The Labor Department knows all about the transitions into 
the workforce. The Department of Education has lots of 
expertise on things like student support services and pedagogy. 
There is not enough information sharing. So we recommend 
standing up--we would recommend standing up an office, staffing 
it, allowing it to deliver technical assistance.
    One last point on the importance of bringing States into 
the equation, too, is that a lot of the times, the evaluators 
of these programs in TAACCCT had a hard time getting a hold of 
good data. If the State were involved as a mandatory partner in 
these grants, we believe that they would be--that colleges 
would have an easier time getting a hold of better data and 
that, in turn, would create stronger evaluations.
    Thank you.
    The Chair. Dr. Bumphus, I am going to apologize to you. My 
time has run out. My hope is, is that you might be able to add 
on in one of your answers, or if I can come back to that. So, 
again, my apologies to you.
    And with that, let me yield to Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And thank you to all the panelists today.
    With regards--I just want to comment because, Mr. Brown, I 
know you mentioned the importance of health training coming out 
of the COVID pandemic. The demographics, combined with what we 
learned from the COVID pandemic, and I am afraid some of the 
diminution in the health workforce following the COVID pandemic 
means that institutions like our community colleges, which I 
think are excellently situation to train a lot of our needed 
healthcare workforce--physician assistants, nurses. At many, 
many levels, community colleges can do a great job, and I think 
that is one of the things that we should emphasize in community 
colleges.
    But I want to ask all of you or any of you who care to 
answer, we are learning a lot about online, doing things 
online. We are doing something online right now. We are all 
better at it than we were a year ago, hopefully.
    And I think that what we are learning from online education 
is there are some students who do very well online. There are 
some who don't do well, but there are some who do very well and 
that it can be an incredibly efficient way to deliver 
education. What is the role or what are community colleges 
doing to go to this new paradigm of learning that I think will 
be with us? Just like telemedicine will be with us for 
healthcare, I think online learning is going to be with us for 
a while.
    Again, it doesn't work for everyone. But for some students 
in some subjects, it is probably very well suited. What is the 
role of community colleges in that? And I would open it up to 
any of the panelists who want to answer.
    Mr. Brown. If I might, I will go ahead and take the first 
stab at this. So what we have learned is that online can be 
very, very powerful for helping students to engage with 
college. And particularly we mentioned some of the life issues 
for students, transportation and childcare. What online can 
offer to students who are dealing with a lot of life issues is 
a measure of convenience and--more than convenience, but a way 
to really engage with the college and navigate through some of 
these transportation issues, for example, would be a prime one. 
So, for some students, it really makes a whole lot of sense.
    What we have seen at Gateway is that a number of our 
younger students, the ones coming right out of high school, 
they have been out of school in some way, shape, or form during 
the last year, that we are really going to have to work to 
engage them. And so we are considering very seriously making a 
number of our courses on ground for them because we really want 
to link them up with the college and meet people and get to 
know us, and that engagement will help support them through 
their college careers.
    So I think that looking at our students and listening to 
them and figuring out what makes the most sense for them, given 
their situations really is the way to go.
    The other thing that I would add for online education is 
that there are a number of models. There are hybrid models. 
There are all different kinds of ways to deliver online 
education. And so looking at those and refining those and 
making them the best that they can be, at the end of the day, 
will do nothing but good things for our students.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you.
    Mr. Bumphus. If I could join, Congressman Harris, in terms 
of responding to your question? First of all, I think it was a 
great question, and you are absolutely correct. That is going 
to be the way of the future.
    But what has happened, I think it has only exacerbated the 
problem of the digital divide. We are finding that many of our 
students just aren't able to participate. And for me, what is 
most concerning is I think when you start to look at the lost 
learning that has occurred over the last year plus, some of our 
students have fallen even further behind.
    You have heard the stories about--and I think Chairwoman 
DeLauro spelled some of these things out in her opening 
statement. But we have had lots of our students that have had 
to go to parking lots to get a hotspot to access their learning 
opportunities, their research opportunities.
    And so, for us, we have got lots of our colleges that are 
investing in digital equipment for their students to learn, but 
what I become increasingly concerned about are those colleges 
that cannot afford to do this. And in that respect, a lot of 
our colleges are having students that are falling further 
behind.
    The one thing I would and I have suggested this in meetings 
I have had with college presidents, my question is always what 
are you doing in regards to professional development? Not all 
faculty members--most faculty members are great teachers, but 
not all of them are adept at teaching online.
    As you well know, effective teaching online is more than 
putting a camera in a classroom. And I have heard stories of a 
lot of our students who are embarrassed by their family 
circumstances, don't want a camera in their living room, dining 
room, if they are able to have one, and some of those 
limitations.
    Mr. Harris. Well, thank you. Yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much.
    I would now like to yield to Congresswoman Roybal-Allard, 
and what I am going to do is to recognize Congresswoman Roybal-
Allard and hand her the gavel while I just move quickly to the 
Interior Committee to see this new Secretary of the Interior 
and be able to welcome her and ask a question. And then I will 
be back.
    And with that, let me relinquish the gavel and recognize 
Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard [presiding]. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And thank you to all the panelists for being here. I know 
just how valuable community colleges are, particularly 
representing one of the poorest minority districts in the 
country.
    Also, as having been a single parent, I also know how 
critical childcare is and how stressful and difficult it can be 
to find quality, affordable childcare.
    Dr. Bumphus, you wrote that 58 percent of community college 
students are women, and the average student age is 28. And many 
are single mothers. According to the Institute of Women's 
Policy Research, just 28 percent of single mothers graduate 
with a degree or certificate within 6 years of enrollment, and 
another 55 percent leave school before earning a college 
credential.
    In your statement, you say that the CCAMPIS program needs 
more congressional commitment. Can you elaborate a little bit 
on how it works? And is it just the commitment of dollars, or 
are there other kinds of support or changes that are needed to 
the program to make it more accessible and less burdensome?
    Mr. Bumphus. Thank you very much for that question, 
Congresswoman.
    Bottom line for me is that the resources are so important, 
and it is just not dollars. What we have got to provide at each 
one of our colleges is more opportunities for apprenticeships, 
work and learn opportunities for these students.
    Our female students, and this is particularly special to 
me. I have got two daughters, and I have six sisters. And I 
have had both daughters go through college, and I know the 
challenges that they have had. I have watched my sisters go 
through college and the challenges that they have had.
    And each one of our institutions talk about the many 
challenges, and sometimes the challenges for our female 
students are greater than our male students because many of 
them are working mothers. And we try and provide the childcare 
necessary for them, but the mentoring opportunities would be 
something I would add to the program and certainly monies to 
support food and housing insecurity if that were an issue for 
them.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. Okay. Dr. Brown, just as a follow-up, my 
understanding is that Gateway Community College is a recipient 
of the CCAMPIS grant. Can you elaborate a little bit on the 
program? How many parents at your college request childcare, 
and how many actually are able to receive it, and what impact 
it has on those that don't receive it?
    Mr. Brown. Sure. So Gateway Community College has an early 
childhood education program, academic program, as well as a 
laboratory school. We have three classrooms, and they hold up 
to 20. So approximately 60 young people are able to take 
advantage of the services there.
    I don't know, I can find out how many people ask for it, 
but I can guarantee you that whatever we are doing, it is not 
enough. There are still way too many students that we have that 
need childcare, and we have partnerships in the community. And 
there really is, I would say, a community-wide recognition of 
the need for appropriate and adequate childcare.
    It has effect not just for the young people themselves, but 
for their families and certainly for their parents who are 
trying to complete school. So I am happy to get more 
information on our program for you, but I can tell you now that 
it is not enough.
    What I will add, if you don't mind, is that in addition to 
the childcare program that we have here, and we used our 
CCAMPIS grant to extend those hours for the laboratory school 
into the evening, we also have a program called the Family 
Economic Security Program, the FESP program, that works with a 
number of our female students, helps them to navigate the 
college. Connects them with resources and services in the 
community, provides coaching and a number of other things.
    And what we are finding is that when we provide those 
supports, that those students are remarkably successful. The 
retention rate for those students is something like 65 percent, 
and these are some of the most vulnerable students we have.
    And so in addition to childcare, there are a number of 
other things that we are looking to do and to provide for not 
only young mothers, but also some of our single dads. We do 
have those as well to facilitate their success in college by 
helping support them in terms of navigating their 
circumstances.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. I see my time is up. Mr. Fleischmann.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And good morning to all of my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle, and to the distinguished witness panel, I have 
really enjoyed your discussion.
    I am really excited about this because in my home State, 
the great State of Tennessee, we are already there. And it is 
truly incredible with what we have done with the Tennessee 
Promise.
    In our State, we afford all high school graduates with the 
opportunity to attend community or technical college free of 
tuition and mandatory fees through the Tennessee Promise. This 
is a last dollar scholarship program that allows students to 
attend any of Tennessee's 13 community colleges or 27 colleges 
of applied technology. And as my colleagues know, I am a big 
fan of applied technology education.
    While the Tennessee Promise is available to all graduating 
seniors, regardless of socioeconomic standing, counselors 
across the State work to target at-risk students who might not 
pursue a secondary education.
    My first question is for Dr. McCarthy. You mentioned in 
your written testimony that community colleges are uniquely 
well positioned to address the economic fallout from the 
recession. How has COVID impacted the need for specialized 
skills, and how will prioritizing high-demand, high-quality 
credentials help stabilize the workforce, and how can we better 
incentivize community and technical enrollment?
    Ms. McCarthy. Thank you very much, Congressman Fleischmann, 
for the excellent question, and I share your enthusiasm for the 
Tennessee Promise program.
    Yes, I believe that the COVID pandemic is having an 
important impact on our labor market that will translate into 
changes in the nature of jobs and changes in the skills that 
are going to be most in demand.
    I think there is little question that the pandemic has 
accelerated automation trends in certain sectors, and so there 
are certain types of jobs that we may not see come back. So we 
are going to be dealing with how to help workers. For example, 
toll booth operators and some workers in the retail and 
hospitality sector are going to need to reskill.
    I think there is little question that there is going to be 
a real need for programs that are specifically designed, 
similar to the Great Recession, for adult learners, people who 
have been out in the workforce for a while. The Tennessee 
Reconnect Program is a good example of a program that is 
thinking about not just young--I am going to talk a little bit 
about high school students, but we really do need to think a 
lot about the displaced workers.
    The workers who have been hardest hit by this pandemic are 
workers without a college degree. These sometimes are workers 
who are very wary of going back to school or maybe didn't have 
a great experience in postsecondary education. So we have 
learned a lot over the last decade about ways to help adults 
get used to college. Again, this gets back to full support 
services.
    But the other key is that we have to make sure--we need to 
have a jobs strategy that goes along with this skills strategy. 
And that is where, again, these sectoral partnerships and 
thinking broadly not just about how community colleges can 
train people, but how they can be part of a set of partnerships 
that actually create jobs and make sure that those transitions 
are good transitions that lead to good jobs.
    And I will second the notion, too, though, that high school 
students, too, are going to--it is critically important that 
they be aware of the changing nature of skills. And in this 
case, we never want to be too specialized. I think there is 
always that mix between very specific skills, but also making 
sure that young people have the kind of broad-based skills that 
make them resilient and capable of engaging in lifelong 
learning.
    So I think we need a set of--we need different strategies, 
depending on where people are in their working life journey and 
where they are in their educational journey.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you so much.
    Dr. Bumphus, how can community and technical colleges 
partner with industries or employers to meet the demands of the 
local economy, sir?
    Mr. Bumphus. Thank you very much for that excellent 
question, Congressman Fleischmann.
    And I want to also congratulate you and the wonderful folks 
in Tennessee for that excellent Tennessee Promise program. I 
have had opportunities to meet with former Governor Haslam and 
Randy Boyd and others down there, as we have used them as a 
model for my office about what can be done and done statewide.
    Now back to your question, I think what needs to happen 
more than anything else is something that we feel like 
routinely is being done, but it is not. And that is the 
communication between our governmental entities and some of the 
business leaders in our community to talk about what needs to 
happen in the workforce side of the house.
    And in my opinion, those are some things that would enhance 
the program. I think Mary Alice spoke to that. I think we have 
got to develop a companion piece of maybe some job action with 
what is happening in terms of the studies that are happening in 
Tennessee and in other places.
    The academic programs are excellent in regard to how they 
are being structured, but maybe not enough emphasis being put 
on the workforce training needs.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Well, thank you, Doctor.
    And my time has expired, but before I yield back, Madam 
Chair, I do want to say the impact on the lives of not only 
high school students, but also older students, who are now 
being given a second chance, is truly inspiring.
    So thank you, to each and every one of you all, for your 
great work, and I will yield back.
    Mr. Bumphus. Thank you, sir.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. Ms. Clark.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, and thank you for this 
wonderful hearing. And I appreciate all the witnesses coming 
forward today.
    I want to follow up on questions started by my colleague 
Congresswoman Roybal-Allard and go back to CCAMPIS for a 
moment. And specifically, I would like to ask you, Dr. Bumphus, 
about the fact that Congress has tripled CCAMPIS funding from 
$15,000,000 to $50,000,000, but we are still serving less than 
1 percent of those who could benefit from this program.
    Can you speak a little bit about the importance of this 
program, and also that in at least 30 States, the average 
yearly cost of childcare surpasses that of in-State tuition and 
what it means to parents who are balancing both childcare and 
community college tuition?
    Mr. Bumphus. Excellent question, Congresswoman Clark, and I 
really wish I had an answer for you that would maybe address 
totally I think some of the challenges we are having.
    First and foremost, I want to say that AACC supports this 
program, and we have been vocal advocates for this program. But 
you are correct. We haven't had the kind of participation that 
any of us would like to see at this point, and yet we still 
hear about the needs of many of our students in regards to 
childcare.
    We have got so many parent learners. We have got so many 
working parents. And we would think that this would be a 
natural, but it just hasn't been that way.
    What we have called for from our office is continued 
meetings of community college leaders, trying to connect the 
dots between what we are hearing from, I guess, the ground 
regarding the need for childcare and what we are seeing 
happening with these applications for this particular program. 
I personally feel it is an excellent program and would 
recommend it highly to community college presidents.
    I have got a daughter that is a community college 
president, very proud of her, and she and I have talked about 
some of the challenges of childcare and being able to make, 
especially in some of our poorest communities, these kinds of 
resources that are out there. But I am afraid I don't have an 
honest answer I could give you in terms of what would be a 
silver bullet.
    I will say to you, and as I prepared for these hearings, I 
have been able to also identify that there are some needs that 
are not being met, and yet there are some resources out there. 
And I would like to say that most community college presidents 
I know can smell a dollar a mile away. If there are resources, 
they will find them.
    But yet this is one particular resource that we haven't 
been able to fully utilize, and I will promise you this today. 
We are going to look into it and see what we can do to get more 
activity in this regard.
    Ms. Clark. Well, thank you for that. Thank you for your 
honesty around that.
    And you know, these are complicated issues, but you have 
spoken so passionately and eloquently about the combination of 
needing to meet this pandemic, which we know has had a 
devastating effect on women in our economy and especially women 
of color. And so I am interested in how we can support not only 
the CCAMPIS program, but how can we support creating incentives 
for workforce development in early childhood education, which 
community colleges play a critical role?
    I have a bill that proposes student repayment if you stay 
in the early childhood field, but I am interested in ideas you 
have and how we can support this workforce.
    Mr. Bumphus. Is that question for me?
    Ms. Clark. Yes, yes. Or anybody.
    Mr. Bumphus. Okay. I had a childcare program at Brookhaven 
College, when I was president there some 20 years ago, that was 
world class. And it was world class because we had hired such 
an outstanding faculty that were prepared to teach students no 
matter where they came from. The problem was the pay was so low 
when they finished the program.
    Ms. Clark. Right, right.
    Mr. Bumphus. And the one thing we didn't want to do is have 
a student spend their good money, their Federal money to attend 
a program that would give them less than what I call family-
sustaining wages. Or another way, have them graduate and then 
still almost be able to qualify to be in a poverty line.
    So we have got to come up with a way that we can present 
opportunities for students when they finish these childcare 
programs to be in a status that they will have more resources 
to support their lifestyle and what they are doing and still 
get them through the best programs. I hate to say it, but 
probably more pay would be helpful.
    Ms. Clark. I don't think you should hate to say it. That is 
the key.
    Thank you so much. I yield back.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. Ms. Herrera Beutler.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you. So I wanted to ask about 
childcare, if anybody can take care of my child, but that has 
already been asked.
    Ms. Clark. Send her over, Jaime.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. This one, she is my third. I am not 
going to send her. I will send the first two.
    Okay. In my district, career and technical education is 
vital to meeting the workforce needs. I think, Ms. Jordan, you 
were talking a little bit about that. And I wanted to see if 
you could speak to best practices for developing partnerships 
with our community colleges and employers in response to each 
local community's needs.
    Because that is one of the things I have observed with my 
community colleges is they are so specific to that community--
and that is not to say you don't want to prepare young people 
for whatever--or older people. I was an older person when I 
went to community college, and I loved my community college 
education. But we want to make sure that they are responding to 
what the needs are in that community and preparing people.
    And I have seen really, really awesome partnerships there, 
but then I have also seen that there needs to be more. So I was 
hoping you could maybe speak to that.
    Ms. Jordan. Absolutely. For us, it really starts with that 
dialogue. Engaging with the community college to really help to 
understand what are the skills needed by a company in that area 
and having that commitment between the community college and 
the company to talk about how the company can give back. 
Looking at a syllabus, providing subject matter experts to be a 
guest speaker in a class, providing pathways to employment. So, 
for us, that could mean internships or apprenticeships as part 
of our program.
    Our P-TECH program I think is also a really fantastic 
example of that. Industry partnerships is key, and so it helps 
students to transition from high school into that dual 
enrollment associate's degree program, and it brings industry 
into the classroom. We start with mentorship in Grade 9. They 
are getting exposure to learning about what it means to work at 
that particular industry partner, and those industry partners 
are local to that school.
    So it is really relevant to what they might be hiring when 
the students graduate, which makes it really easy for them to 
transition after 4 years, 5 years, or 6 years, however long it 
may take them to complete both that high school and associate's 
degree, into employment. Hopefully, at that company or in 
another company in the area.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. I think, to that point, one of the 
other things I have seen--I think Congressman Fleischmann was 
talking about this--is the early partnership. So we always 
think about community college is a 2-year degree. You know, you 
are at a certain point.
    But in Washington State, we have pathways for high school 
students, and so you can dual--you can do both the dual 
associate's degree along with finishing your diploma. And this 
dope was like, no, why would I want to leave my senior year and 
be off campus? Which I look back and I thought perhaps maybe 
paying--free first 2 years of college and saving that time 
versus paying for it at a 4-year institution.
    And so I think marrying that community college time with 
industry, you know, just access. Just seeing like, ``Oh, is 
that something I want to go into?'' is really critical. I am a 
huge fan of our community colleges. I think they are such a 
flexible, tough key to making sure that our workforce will 
continue to evolve in the way that it should.
    They are nimble and they--if we can make sure there is 
childcare, they make sure that nothing gets old and stale. Like 
they are always having to revamp.
    Whoever it was that I think who said they know how to 
squeeze a dollar, I love that about you guys. So I am looking 
forward to hearing and supporting your request as we move 
forward in this committee.
    So I will mute myself and yield back. Thanks, Madam Chair.
    The Chair [presiding]. Let me say thank you to my 
colleague, Lucille Roybal-Allard, for taking over in my 
absence.
    And with that, let me recognize Congresswoman Frankel.
    Ms. Frankel. Good morning. How is everybody?
    Thank you to our guests today.
    I wanted to tell you something first. Ava Parker, who is 
our very able leader of our community college in Palm Beach 
County, actually they call them now State colleges, but it is 
similar to yours, it was a community-type college. Here is what 
she told us.
    Enrollment has declined 13 percent in the fall and 15 
percent for the spring. Many students don't have laptops or 
Internet. So they can't do remote learning. And many students 
work, and when their jobs were cut, they had to stop school.
    Faculty are concerned about returning to the school as some 
students refuse vaccines. The State cut the budget and vetoed 
the funding for an online library system. Forty-eight colleges 
are accepting less transfers from community colleges.
    They have had to decrease class size because of social 
distancing. There are not enough rooms for all classes on 
campus. So I am assuming that is a common issue across the 
country.
    My first question is in regards--and whoever wants to 
answer this. Is AACC undertaking any efforts to improve the 
transfer process for students, particularly disadvantaged 
students, when they want to transfer from a community college 
to, I guess, to one of their State schools or another what we 
call a university or college? And are additional Federal 
resources needed?
    Mr. Bumphus. Representative Frankel, I will take that 
question, if you don't mind? I would say, first and foremost, 
your State of Florida probably has the best system of transfer 
in the country.
    And by the way, your president is outstanding. She is on my 
board, and I can attest to work closely with her on a lot of 
different things.
    But despite some progress, transfer remains problematic in 
many places, and that is due to a variety of things. In some 
States, it is a policy issue. In other States, there are not 
enough folks in the universities that are communicating with 
community colleges, and AACC initiated what we are calling an 
Equity in Transfer project about 6 months ago that is getting 
rave reviews.
    We are addressing States where the equity issues are 
becoming clear regarding those students that are students of 
color being able to transfer and have their credits accepted on 
par with white students. And that is happening. And we have got 
some policy things that we are working on at a lot of different 
levels.
    So the Equity in Transfer initiative is one thing I would 
speak to that is occurring that is bringing more transfer 
programs in line, and we are seeing increased numbers already. 
We are working closely with AAC&U, the Association of Colleges 
and Universities, and APLU, the land grant universities in the 
country. And so that relationship has really started to be 
executed, and we are starting to see the increased progress 
just in terms of the relationships between our college 
presidents and our university presidents.
    Ms. Frankel. This may be sort of a simpleton question. But 
just could you explain why it is so much more expensive or I 
should say less expensive to go to a community college than a 
regular college? I don't know what I call ``regular,'' but a 
college or a university?
    Mr. Bumphus. I get that question a lot, surprisingly, and I 
don't want to speak to the expenses of a university. But in all 
likelihood, some of those expenses revolve around the cost of 
the faculty.
    You know, we focus on teaching in our colleges. Not a lot 
of research necessarily, but excellent teaching. We focus on 
hiring faculty members that want to teach, that want to work 
with students. And I have to say my comments are based not just 
on my experience working in community colleges, but I worked at 
the University of Texas at Austin, where I was a fully tenured 
professor, in fact was chair of the department.
    And when it comes to hiring faculty members who are 
researchers, those expenses become a little bit more 
significant. And so that is a part of the increased cost, but 
also you are talking about a student that perhaps will maybe 
want to attend a football game on Saturday and some other 
things that are associated with university life, of which we 
all perhaps participated and greatly enjoyed. But those 
expenses become a little bit more expensive for a student to 
matriculate than probably the nuts and bolts for a community 
college.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you. I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Cline.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this 
hearing.
    Community colleges are invaluable to the localities and 
students they serve to educate and prepare them to enter the 
workforce. They provide more flexible education and skilled 
opportunities at affordable cost. They work to ensure that 
students of all ages are able to succeed in completing their 
education by providing options that work for those with 
families dependent on them or those who are balancing current 
employment. And their pathways to completion and employment are 
effective and provide opportunities for profitable careers.
    In my home State of Virginia, we are blessed to have many 
wonderful institutions of higher education. Community colleges 
play a large role in providing those opportunities for 
Virginians, and I have three different community colleges that 
serve the students of the Sixth Congressional District.
    We have programs like FastForward Virginia that work with 
community colleges to provide job training in essential fields 
that are completed in a matter of weeks, not years. And with 
this program, trainees are responsible for one-third of the 
cost, and the participating colleges are held accountable to 
provide training by only receiving the remainder of the funds 
once the student completes the program.
    These programs are designed to meet the needs of local 
employers, and some have guaranteed interview agreements with 
the local businesses after completion. This type of training 
provides an affordable education and skilled learning that 
gives the students the opportunity to get into the workforce 
sooner. I look forward to continuing to work with community 
colleges in Virginia to provide innovative opportunities like 
FastForward to students, and I am thankful for those dedicated 
to teaching and educating the future generation in my home 
district.
    Let me go ahead and throw it out there to anyone who might 
want to answer. Community colleges offer education 
opportunities to many students who are caring for a family. And 
with the K-12 school closures particularly in the State of 
Virginia being as strict as they were or have been, I would 
like to know how this impacted community college students who 
are now having to step into a new role of assisting with remote 
education for their children. And did it impact enrollment 
numbers, and did any other closures across the country impact 
students at community colleges?
    Mr. Bumphus. Congressman Cline, I will try that question if 
you don't mind? Certainly, we have heard from a lot of our 
students who did not return that are trying to make sure that 
they were caring in some cases for a multigenerational home, if 
you will. Their students attending K-12 and having to work with 
them on virtual learning, they themselves in a virtual learning 
classroom that was probably more than they could take.
    A lot of students, as you know, pivoted rapidly in March of 
2020, going from in-person classes that they were doing very 
well with to having to go to school virtually with no option. 
That was what they had to do. And in many cases, they did it. 
They didn't really complain much, I guess. But they, bottom 
line, did it.
    But when it was time for them to return in the fall, we had 
some students saying to us not so much for them for that fall 
and then again for the spring. Another challenge that we have 
heard folks talking about has been I talked about that digital 
divide. I want to keep talking about that.
    In fact, I did a presentation recently for some group, and 
I got introduced as Walter ``Broadband'' Bumphus. They said, 
``We know you are going to talk about broadband and the 
challenges.'' I said, ``Well, look, I won't say much about it, 
but I will say this,'' you know?
    But the other side of the coin has been you are exactly 
right. That has been a challenge. When you are trying to 
navigate Zoom for the first time in your life and you really 
aren't familiar with technology, that can be a major challenge. 
And then you double that with trying to deal with your 
students' lessons, and they are not prepared to be a teacher, 
that is another challenge. So----
    Mr. Cline. Thank you very much.
    You know, I have heard from some community colleges in my 
home district and in Virginia that instead of supporting a 
doubling of Pell, they support expanding it to be permitted for 
use for shorter-term training programs like the one I described 
earlier. What other initiatives can make classes and programs 
provided by community colleges more accessible to students?
    Mr. Bumphus. I will try that one and then let my colleagues 
add on. You know, the short-term Pell, if you ask most 
community college presidents, that will be their top priority. 
More so than doubling Pell.
    Now certainly an enhanced Pell award would make it easier 
for our students to afford some more wraparound services, if 
you will, and so I won't continue to elaborate on that. I see 
our red light on, and so with that, I am going to say thank you 
so much for your question. You have got a great system of 
colleges in Virginia, sir.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you very much.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Bustos.
    Mrs. Bustos. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. I 
appreciate it.
    I had something really, really awesome happen yesterday, 
which was the First Lady came to visit one of the community 
colleges that serves the congressional district that I 
represent, Sauk Valley Community College. Also with her was the 
Secretary of Education. And it leads to what I am really 
curious about and what I am hoping maybe, Dr. McCarthy, I am 
going to address this to you. But if anybody else would like to 
chime in. But one of the labs that we all visited together, 
along with our Governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker, was a lab 
for nurses.
    And we met this 64-year-old nurse who had been an LPN and 
was going back to community college so she could get her RN 
degree. And as we were talking with her, I thought this is what 
we need more of, people to maybe advance their degrees in some 
line of healthcare or people to go into this line of work.
    Because the congressional district that I serve is 14 
counties, covers the entire northwestern corner of the State of 
Illinois. But nine of the counties are provider shortage areas, 
all right? So 9 of the 14 counties are short on dental care, as 
well as mental health. Eleven of the 14 counties are short on 
primary care providers.
    So it is clear to me, especially after this visit by the 
First Lady, that community college can play an incredible role 
in providing nursing--people coming out of the nursing 
programs, dental programs, dental hygienists and other degrees.
    So, Dr. McCarthy, why don't I address this to you? But what 
role should community colleges have in fighting healthcare 
provider shortages that we are seeing all over this country, 
especially in rural areas like the one I represent? And 
probably part two of that question is what more can Congress do 
to support community colleges to help address those shortages?
    Ms. McCarthy. Congresswoman Bustos, thank you for that 
excellent question, and yes, I couldn't agree more.
    Community colleges do need to be on the frontline of 
replenishing our healthcare workforce and creating 
opportunities, too, for our frontline and essential healthcare 
workers that have been working so hard and who need that next 
step in their career. So I would tell you the community 
colleges are really the workhorse of the healthcare workforce 
development. They are the primary source of our nursing 
workforce and then also all of our, again, our frontline 
healthcare workers.
    So, again, I think targeted investment to help colleges 
sort of meet this need would be very helpful. Also targeted 
investments that include some sort of opportunities to create 
more partnerships with nursing homes, hospital systems, 
different clinical settings. Because one of the major obstacles 
for a lot of these colleges in expanding these programs is 
access to clinical opportunities.
    So we need to think more about how do we get more clinical 
opportunities available to community college students and what 
sort of incentives and how can we structure an investment that 
gets those providers of clinical spaces to open those up a 
little bit more.
    I will just say two more things quickly. One of the other 
big challenges that we have is that community colleges also 
provide a lot of training for our very first step into 
healthcare jobs. Those are certified nursing assistants and 
some of the patient technical assistance--patient techs and 
pharma techs that we have been hearing about. But a lot of 
students, those jobs, as we have been talking about, pay so 
little that a lot of students have a difficult time doing just 
what the person you talked about, the LPN going back for their 
RN.
    So we need to do something about the wages of those 
frontline certified nursing assistants, home health aides, and 
other sort of frontline healthcare workers who just make too 
little and are in a lot of economic uncertainty because of it.
    And then the last thing I will say, too, is that what we 
have been seeing, we have been doing a lot of research on 
community colleges that take their students all the way to the 
bachelor's degree. Both the State of Florida and the State of 
Washington community colleges, they do that quite a bit. And 
that has been a big driver of increasing the share of 
respiratory therapists, nurses at the bachelor degree level, 
and other healthcare workers.
    So, I mean, I think thinking about how can we free 
community colleges up, particularly in rural areas, to bring 
their healthcare workers from the entry level all the way to 
the bachelor's degree is something we need to focus on more.
    Thank you.
    Mrs. Bustos. Very good. Thank you, Dr. McCarthy.
    I have only got about a half a minute left. So rather than 
ask a follow-up question that will take a little bit too long, 
I will yield back the remainder of my time.
    And again, Madam Chair, thank you very much for hosting 
this hearing today.
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very much. Congresswoman 
Watson Coleman.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you to each of the witnesses. You all have been a 
fountain of information.
    I am a huge fan of county colleges because I think the 
county colleges meet so many different diverse needs and get to 
our very diverse populations. So, ``hear, hear'' from me. I 
just need to know what you need in order to be able to do the 
things that are important in our communities.
    I am very interested in this issue of new collar positions 
that Ms. Jordan spoke about. I would like to know more about 
that because I think that that is something that transitions 
people from high school to college to workable programs to 
good-paying jobs. So if you would just elaborate on what these 
new collar positions include?
    Ms. Jordan. Absolutely. For us, new collar can really 
include most jobs that exist, anything that requires a skill, 
but not necessarily a traditional degree. So that could include 
jobs in healthcare. It could include jobs in technology. For 
us, we really looked heavily at technology roles, and that is 
why we created our apprenticeship program to focus on 
cybersecurity developers, software developers, designers, data 
scientists, building those skills from within.
    Our P-TECH dual enrollment program as well is another great 
example. We do have many graduates of that program that choose 
to transition on to higher education, but allowing those 
students to earn both their high school degree and that 
associate's degree at no cost becomes a fantastic bridge into 
employment immediately upon graduation in many cases. So----
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. How do you all pay for that? Does IBM 
underwrite the cost of that?
    Ms. Jordan. P-TECH is funded through dual enrollment 
programs in the different States. So it is funded through the 
State for the community college degree. Industry partners 
provide mentorship, job opportunities, internships, and in many 
cases, job opportunities upon graduation like IBM does.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. I invite you all to the State of New 
Jersey. We have got a very robust county college system, and I 
represent at least four of them. And I have worked with all of 
them in every one of the 21 counties when I was a trustee for 
the 4-year colleges and my husband was a trustee for the 2-year 
colleges. So we are very much supporters of both the 4-year 
State colleges and the county colleges.
    I also like the idea of county colleges having the programs 
available for students who are in high school. I wish that we 
could get to them at even an earlier age so they could 
understand what opportunities exist, how that English course is 
important, how that math course is important, how that science 
course relates to the next level in their lives.
    I am very interested in seeing that the Pell grants are 
increased. And Dr. Bumphus, you said that if you had a choice, 
you would want to see an increase in the short-term Pell 
programs as opposed to just an increase in Pell grants.
    Could you elaborate a little bit on that? What are the 
short-term Pell grant uses? I am not sure I followed you, but I 
got kind of sidetracked out of the committee hearing. So----
    Mr. Bumphus. I will elaborate if you would like, yes.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. I would. Thank you.
    Mr. Bumphus. Thank you very much for the question, 
Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    Specifically speaking, Pell grant eligibility requires you 
to be taking a certain number of courses and credit hours, and 
you might have to enroll for nine credits when a student really 
should go and take a three-credit course or a six-credit course 
and still have a certificate that would allow him or her to do 
whatever program they are being trained to do.
    Right now, the Pell grant--so my comment was not an either/
or. I would like to see both/and, if you will. But it would 
allow those students who want to just come and come for a short 
period of time, and oftentimes, these are students who have 
already earned their degree. Something like 15 to 17 percent of 
students in community colleges already have a baccalaureate or 
a master's degree and are simply wanting to return to get their 
qualifications and certification to get a job, you know, as 
quickly as they possible can.
    And so that was the point I was making. Certainly, the Pell 
grant would open up many more resources for a student.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. I appreciate that because I think 
there is a whole bunch of retooling that is necessary now, and 
then we find that there are very valuable jobs that 4-year 
college graduates or even master's graduates don't necessarily 
qualify for. But some specific education in the field that they 
are interested in is very viable, very important, and we should 
think about doing what we can to support it.
    In New Jersey, we have a lot of articulation agreements 
between county colleges and State colleges. And there are some 
county colleges where you can get your 4-year degree right on 
the county college campus, even though it is with the 
relationship with another 4-year college.
    So there are just so many opportunities that exist on that 
level, and I, for one, am a supporter of county colleges. And 
whatever we need, I would like to be able to support.
    I am also a supporter of the TRIO program because getting 
to those first-generation, those underserved communities and 
those young people that don't have the kind of confidence, 
courage, or even the kind of support that they need in their 
home life, letting them know that there are options for them is 
so vitally important.
    I thank you so much for today's hearing. And Madam Chair, I 
yield back my time.
    The Chair. Thank you very, very much. Congressman Harder.
    Mr. Harder. Wonderful. Thank you so much, Chair DeLauro, 
for hosting this hearing on a very important topic.
    And thank you to the witnesses for contributing their 
testimony.
    As a former instructor at Modesto Junior College, I have 
seen firsthand the positive impact that community colleges can 
have in transforming lives. And in my district, only about 17 
percent of adults actually end up with a 4-year bachelor's 
degree. Eighty-three percent don't. And so community colleges 
and the opportunity they offer are incredibly critical to folks 
that I represent.
    Knowing the value of apprenticeship opportunities, I 
introduce a trades and career education package, a skills 
package last Congress that was focused on addressing different 
needs within the career and trades education space, including 
giving students more opportunities for career education in 
community colleges and throughout the lifecycle of their 
educational journey.
    It breaks my heart when I meet with employers who say they 
are having trouble filling high-paying jobs with local 
students, and then right afterwards, sometimes within a matter 
of hours, I will meet with community college students who are 
looking to graduate and are scared that they won't be able to 
find a job in our communities. And that lack of matching 
strikes me as a real failure and something we can do much 
better on.
    Ms. Jordan, I was very interested reading your testimony 
about the work that IBM is doing with community colleges. I 
believe in business and community college collaboration to 
build skills-based programs, and I think there are far too few 
of these programs across the country. What do you think limits 
this type of collaboration, and what can the public sector and 
this committee do to better incentivize that the type of 
programs that we are talking about today are the norm and not 
the exception?
    Ms. Jordan. I think in many cases, some of it is an 
awareness challenge. When we first started developing our 
apprenticeship program, there weren't a lot of apprenticeships 
in the technology industry. They were very historically limited 
to trades roles.
    And so we started from scratch building our program. And it 
was very successful. As I mentioned, it grew twice as fast as 
expected. And in the 3\1/2\ years since it has existed, we have 
had over 500 apprentices enter our program.
    But we regularly heard from others who were interested in 
doing the same and did not know where to start. And so, in 
2019, we teamed up with the Consumer Technology Association to 
launch the CTA Apprenticeship Coalition, where we essentially 
open sourced all of our frameworks, playbooks, and guidance to 
help other companies start their own apprenticeship program.
    So what took us roughly 6 months from conception through 
DOL registration, other companies have been able to do in a 
period as short as 2 to 4 weeks, leveraging all of the 
materials that we have shared with them.
    We also share those frameworks and guidance with members of 
the Business Roundtable, Aspen Institute, through many of our 
partnerships. We have also worked with the California 
Department of Technology, who recently adopted our 
apprenticeship framework to launch their own apprenticeships. 
And so we have seen really a groundswell there, helping other 
companies to adopt these types of programs.
    There is the need for replicable models on the community 
college side as well. For schools to then understand what is 
required for an apprenticeship and ensure that we are able to 
deliver the curriculum, if that is the type of partnership that 
the company would seek.
    Programs like the Learning Credential Network that I spoke 
about as well are also valuable. That type of infrastructure 
would actually provide job seekers with the transparency around 
how their validated skills can match to open and in-demand 
roles. So infrastructure will play a key role in helping those 
job seekers find opportunities.
    Mr. Harder. Terrific. Thank you.
    It feels like there is just so much interest from the 
community college side, from the employer side, from the 
student side, and yet these programs are altogether too rare.
    Dr. Bumphus, would love to hear from you in sort of our 
final minute. From the community college side, what do you 
believe is limiting the proliferation of programs like the ones 
we are talking about today?
    Mr. Bumphus. Oftentimes, and I know this is going to sound 
basic, the only limitation I have seen is when there is not 
appropriate communication between that business member that you 
said that you ran into and that college president. I have found 
that there is little that can't be accomplished when you have 
the business community and college presidents chatting and 
coming together.
    I have been a college president off and on between being a 
university professor and the job I am in now over the last 30 
years, sir, and I have found that each and every time I have 
sat down with a corporate or a business CEO, there was never 
anything we couldn't really work out as we started chatting 
about it at our level. And if there was a need for us to 
develop a program, oftentimes corporate leaders say, hey, look, 
we will build it. Or we will support--we will provide support 
for the expensive equipment.
    And when you can do that, get your faculty involved, sir, 
not much you can't accomplish.
    Mr. Harder. Terrific. Well, thank you so much. And I see my 
time up.
    With that, I yield back to the chair. Thank you.
    Mr. Bumphus. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Lee.
    Ms. Lee of California. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    Thank you to our witnesses.
    This is such an important hearing, and I really appreciate 
you, Madam Chair, for holding this and also with our witnesses 
today. I come from California, and community colleges are 
really the primary means for black and Latino students to gain 
an education, a skill, job training, whatever. Community 
colleges provide us. Community colleges are it. And so I just 
want to thank you and salute you and just say how supportive I 
am of this.
    We have in California, unfortunately, the end of 
affirmative action in the 1990s. So, primarily, students of 
color, especially black and Latino students are--they don't get 
admitted to the University of California. And my alma mater, UC 
Berkeley, maybe between 2 and 4 percent are students of color. 
And the highest number of students from any State going to 
HBCUs are from California because of the barriers to higher 
education in California.
    And so, having said that, I wanted to drill down a little 
bit on minority-serving institutions. We have no HBCUs west of 
the Mississippi. So we have PBIs through community colleges and 
Hispanic-serving institutions. Want to find out do you know 
where they are? Because some PBIs don't even know that they are 
eligible to be a PBI, and what type of benefits are there for 
becoming a minority-serving institution or PBI.
    And then, secondly, Mr. Fleishmann and I work on additional 
funding every year for computer science for all for our young, 
K through 12 black and girls--black and Latino girls of color, 
low-income girls in public schools. So how can community 
colleges work with our public schools to get some of these 
resources out of what we appropriate every year for technology 
education?
    Mr. Bumphus, I guess I would start with you. And thank you 
all again so much for being here.
    Mr. Bumphus. Congresswoman Lee, thank you so much for your 
always great support for our community colleges. We really 
appreciate that.
    But to your question, first of all, I don't know if you are 
aware, but there are a lot of community colleges that are MSIs, 
HSIs, and PBIs, and we proudly make that statement. But what we 
can do more of is perhaps have them jointly do programs for 
students. And I want to back up for a minute and just say 
community colleges greatly support our MSIs and PBIs, and I 
work very closely with Lezli Baskerville and a number of the 
folks that lead those programs.
    But we believe that if we can get more of our students 
attending some of those PBIs and MSIs, then we have a better 
transfer relationship as well. We have great relationships, but 
they need to be improved. We don't have enough of our students 
looking at our HBCUs as options, and we have started to do more 
in that regard.
    Ms. Lee of California. Let me just mention one thing really 
quickly.
    Mr. Bumphus. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Lee of California. A lot of our students don't know 
that community colleges have that designation as minority-
serving institutions or PBIs.
    Mr. Bumphus. You know what is really sad? Some of the 
colleges didn't realize they had that distinction. I think that 
was your point earlier.
    I was at a college recently in New Jersey, and they got 
information that I believe was something like 24 or 25 percent 
of their students had to be from a Hispanic background to 
qualify as an Hispanic-serving institution. They had the 
largest celebration I think I had ever seen just because of 
that designation. I think you are going to find more of our 2-
year colleges looking at that because of where the resources 
are.
    I made a statement earlier in my testimony today that 
college presidents can generally smell money, and where there 
is money, they will try to find a way to address programs to 
access some of those resources. These are some outstanding 
programs that are available through these particular programs, 
and regretfully, not enough of our colleges have taken 
advantage of that.
    We need to do more. I agree.
    Ms. Lee of California. Yes, yes. Well, Madam Chair, and Dr. 
Bumphus, and to all of our witnesses in this space, I would 
like to figure out a way we can follow up with you. Because I 
know just in California, for example, in my community colleges, 
they do not have that information.
    They do not know what Federal funds are available as PBIs 
or minority-serving institutions for them to go after. And so 
we have got to figure out how to communicate that to them.
    Mr. Bumphus. I will make a commitment to you here today. 
Eloy Oakley is a great friend of mine, the chancellor of the 
system out there, and we have got several of your college 
presidents that serve on my board. I am going to make this a 
priority for just me personally to communicate with Eloy and 
those presidents, and we will follow up with you, and we will 
get something done on this.
    Ms. Lee of California. Thank you again. Because the only--I 
am telling you, community colleges for black and Latino 
students are it in terms of higher education in California. And 
so I will do anything I can do to help support and grow those 
resources for the education of our young people, who really 
have many barriers to the universities in California.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Bumphus. That is sad, but true. But I will commit to 
get back to you on that.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Lee of California. Okay. Thank you.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. What I want to do now is if we can 
keep ourselves, I would like to deal with a kind of a second 
round, but a lightning round here. If we can do this in 2 
minutes each and then wrap it up?
    And I know several people are still here. So let us just go 
very, very quickly. And I don't know--anyone, Dr. Bumphus, I 
get to you, but anybody else can jump in, or you can get back 
to me.
    We fund formula grants--Perkins, CTE, adult education, 
WIOA. We do competitive grants--apprenticeships, the 
Strengthening Community college Colleges Training Grant, et 
cetera. What are the most effective Federal levers for 
supporting community colleges? Where should we go?
    I would like to get your opinion and if I could quickly get 
others.
    Mr. Bumphus. I would perhaps start with the Pell grants 
because of what they do. But in regard to programs, we worked 
with the Labor in regards to the apprenticeship grants. They 
are so important.
    Perkins I can't say enough about, and TRIO programs. Those 
are the grants that I am probably most familiar with as a 
practitioner. My very first job at a college was working in 
TRIO, and I am so intimately familiar with all the nuances that 
are involved with TRIO grants and the difference that they 
make. So I would cite those again.
    The Chair. Okay. Let me ask anyone else, please jump in. I 
have got a minute and 2 seconds. Let us go.
    Ms. Jordan. From our perspective, anything that could help 
to fund pathways to employment. So the apprenticeship grants or 
funding to support the expansion of P-TECH programs would be 
critical for us.
    The Chair. Okay. Great. Thank you.
    Mr. Brown. I would say----
    Ms. McCarthy. I would say that----
    Mr. Brown. Oh, go ahead. I will go last.
    The Chair. Okay.
    Ms. McCarthy. Okay. Very quickly, I would just say again we 
need investments that help community colleges build their 
capacity. So it is important that we fund the student aid 
programs. Pell grant is absolutely critical, but we also have 
to have dollars that go to build the capacity of the colleges, 
either through competitive grants, Perkins, WIOA, and of 
course, the adult ed and the investment in apprenticeship. But 
it is capacity plus student aid.
    The Chair. Okay. And Dr. Brown.
    Mr. Brown. Last, but not least, all of those programs, 
particularly the ones that sort of are directed to community 
colleges, are all absolutely necessary--Pell, TRIO, and so on. 
But I would also encourage not to forget the kinds of funding 
and supports that are going to help students outside because, 
again, the barriers that our students face to completing are 
connected with family and childcare and so on.
    The Chair. For supportive services. Thank you.
    Let me yield to the Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
    And I would just like to give Ms. Jordan and McCarthy an 
opportunity to follow up on my question before, which is that 
community colleges can be at the forefront of figuring out how 
this new paradigm of adult education of online learning can 
exist going into the future. What do the community colleges 
need in order to refine this technique? Again, looking to the 
future as this becomes the way adults will learn.
    Ms. Jordan. Access to a tool like the Learning Credential 
Network is certainly one thing to focus on. Infrastructure 
needs. There has been a lot of conversation about the 
supportive services. We believe online education is absolutely 
a huge play as well. Many IBMers are very regularly learning 
online.
    But for many learners, they don't have access to secure 
Internet or even to laptops, and so as we think about the 
proliferation here, infrastructure services will also be really 
critical.
    Ms. McCarthy. And I think--thank you Congressman Harris, 
and I would agree with all of those, and I would just add in, 
too, I think there needs to be more resources for community 
colleges to collaborate. It was mentioned earlier about 
community colleges sort of going in together on equipment 
purchases, things like simulators. And some of these things can 
be very big capital investments. Enabling colleges to sort of 
go in on those together and develop shared use programs is 
something that we have been seeing over this last year, and 
that has been very effective.
    And then, again, also just dollars for--to buy the 
necessary infrastructure equipment and software needed and to 
do the professional development that Dr. Bumphus has mentioned 
many times is so important for the faculty and the support 
service staff to be effective using these new technologies.
    Mr. Bumphus. Congressman Harris, if I could add one more 
thing, that I didn't speak about the importance of 
infrastructure. I can't say enough about that, but we haven't 
talked much this morning about our small and rural colleges. 
Such needs there. Everything we have said today, this morning, 
has been perhaps magnified in terms of the need in our small 
and rural colleges.
    Mr. Brown. And I would only add professional development, 
as several of us has mentioned, but also programs like 
apprenticeships that really help our students to both work and 
learn at the same time.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you. I yield back.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Roybal-Allard.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. Okay. I would like to raise two issues 
very, very quickly. Dr. McCarthy, according to the Child 
Welfare League in America, 11 percent of students at 2-year 
institutions are experiencing homelessness due to the pandemic. 
While up to 30 percent of 2-year institutions offer on-campus 
housing, many students still find themselves with no access to 
housing, food, or broadband access. Where should this 
subcommittee focus to help community colleges address this 
issue?
    And secondly, my second question would be is that--and you 
partially answered this when you were responding to Mrs. 
Bustos. In your written statement, you say that one of the 
barriers to expanding apprenticeships into industries beyond 
construction is that career entry and advancement in high-
growth fields like health, which you talked about earlier, but 
also you include business services, information technology, 
manufacturing, require college degrees, which only institutions 
of higher education can deliver.
    Can you also give some additional examples of what you 
would consider targeted investments? Because you mention that 
they need to be targeted. So if you could answer those two 
questions in the time I have, I would appreciate it.
    Ms. McCarthy. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    Yes, I will start with the last one, which is, again, I 
think we need targeted investments similar to--targeted 
investments in helping community colleges build degree 
apprenticeship programs because you have career advancement in 
many fields, particularly in licensed professions, and areas 
like healthcare do require academic or credentials that only 
institutions of higher education can award.
    But colleges really do not know how to build these programs 
very well. They just don't have experience, and I think with 
some targeted investments on how can colleges build credit-
bearing apprenticeship programs with industry that result and 
they culminate in a degree would help move the field forward.
    And then, in terms of your first question around how to 
help the many students who are--again, that need access to many 
more benefits, housing, food. Again, I think we need some 
targeted investments around that specific issue of how colleges 
can work with their local health and human service agencies, 
community-based organizations, come up with some models that 
allow for them to be able to reach the students who need them 
and sort of deal with their housing and food insecurity needs 
and childcare needs.
    But it requires partnerships. The community colleges cannot 
do this on their own, and that is one of the biggest 
challenges, I believe.
    Ms. Roybal-Allard. Thank you.
    The Chair. Congressman Cline.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    I want to thank Dr. Bumphus for recognizing the importance 
of rural institutions as well. Most of my district is rural, 
and the five community colleges that go across the whole 
district definitely are responding to the need to serve rural 
students.
    One of the ways that we are serving--that these colleges 
are serving students in our area is through dual enrollment. 
These opportunities give high school students a great 
opportunity to start earning college credits that will allow 
them to graduate early. And I spoke with President Blosser from 
Lord Fairfax Community College and Dr. Downey from Blue Ridge 
Community College about dual enrollment opportunities that they 
offer and ways to help ensure that they are truly serving their 
communities.
    Can you identify some of the main barriers that you see 
that discourage high school students, current high school 
students from taking dual enrollment courses and getting a jump 
start on their higher education?
    Mr. Bumphus. There are a couple barriers I would cite, sir. 
First being who is going to pay for it? And it is not the 
student, but is it the K-12 district? Is it going to be the 
community college?
    Secondly, and maybe the biggest barrier sometimes, is 
finding qualified faculty to teach the courses. Not that the K-
12 faculty aren't qualified and certainly the community college 
faculty would be qualified, but the SACS, Southern Association 
of Colleges and Schools, the accrediting arm that accredits 
your State and others in the South, requires that the faculty 
member of record teaching the course has to have a master's 
degree and 18 graduate credit hours in whatever subject they 
are teaching.
    And oftentimes while the K-12 teacher might be very 
qualified in teaching a given course, they may not be qualified 
by SACS accreditation standards. And so those are a couple of 
the barriers.
    I would draw your attention to an article that Dan 
Domenech, who is head of AASA, the school superintendents 
association, and I co-wrote about 3 weeks ago about dual credit 
programs and what can be done. In fact, I will get you a copy 
of that as soon as this meeting is over.
    We hold meetings twice a year on dual credit and what can 
be done. We bring together 12 superintendents, 12 college 
presidents for that specific purpose. Because we believe there 
are so many opportunities out there, and we have got a lot of 
low-hanging fruit that we are not taking advantage of.
    But thank you for your support, and we will get you some 
information on that.
    Mr. Cline. You hit the nail on the head with flexibility 
among the States for training teachers. That is so important.
    Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Frankel.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you. And to the panel, thank you again 
for your time and your service to our communities.
    I want to just follow up on my colleagues' questions on the 
digital divide, and really how is--what is the best way for 
Congress to help the situation and just in terms of funding? Is 
it through grants, loan programs at the community college? Are 
there any programs that you know of that are successful, and 
can you quantify the problem?
    Mr. Bumphus. I will take a shot at that, Representative 
Frankel, and I will start by saying, and I think Congressman 
Cline touched on it. And the flexibility piece, I really 
applaud the Department of Ed and the flexibility that they have 
provided in their most recent guidance, if you will, for how 
the CARES funding to be spent, the CRRSSA funds, and the rescue 
funds. And if we had more opportunities to utilize some of the 
funding that we get in a way that colleges can provide laptops 
and other technology equipment to their students, it would go a 
long way towards addressing some of the digital issues that we 
have.
    Ms. Frankel. What would be the format? Are you thinking of 
a loan, a grant? How would--if you had the ability to do that, 
how would you get the equipment to the students? What would be 
the format?
    Mr. Bumphus. Great question, and a pretty complicated 
question for just a simple answer. Right now, the mechanism I 
think may be the best mechanism would be to utilize some of the 
monies we get for these in terms of stimulus dollars that we 
received. Being able to have more flexibility with those 
dollars as the Department has awarded----
    Ms. Frankel. I am just going to interrupt you, but what is 
the connection with the school and the student? In other words, 
do you see giving a computer to a student or lending a computer 
to a student?
    Mr. Bumphus. Both/and. Most colleges received some stimulus 
dollars over the last 6 or 8 months. And they in the past were 
prevented from utilizing those dollars for equipment. Most 
recently, we have been given some latitude of how we can spend 
those dollars.
    In the CARES Act initial funding, 50 percent of the dollars 
a college received had to go to students, but they were 
prevented from utilizing those dollars for the purposes of 
digital support. And most recently under the new Secretary of 
Ed Cardona, they have allowed us to use many more of those 
dollars for this purpose.
    Mr. Brown. If I could add, our college has a laptop lending 
program that we have used through our library. And then our 
foundation over the past year raised funding to distribute 650 
laptops to students who needed them to deal with the pandemic.
    So absent a sort of a complete sort of taking care of this, 
I think it is going to be a number of different mechanisms for 
funding coming together to support the needs of our students.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you. Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. I just might add on that point 
because I think the digital divide is such an important issue 
because it is not just at this moment in terms of an education. 
I think we are going to look at the jobs of the future being 
more targeted at digital, and what we don't want to do is 
exacerbate that digital divide now so that those people who are 
already behind will get further behind.
    And I think we have to look at philanthropic organizations 
as well who are willing to help us out with this effort in a 
number of ways.
    Let me just ask Congressman Harris for any closing remarks 
or comments that he would like to make, and then I will wrap it 
up. But you have all been wonderful.
    Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. No, thank you all very much, and thank you, 
Madam Chair, for calling the hearing.
    Look, the bottom line is that community colleges I think in 
the past, present, and especially into the future are 
incredibly important, as we get into the 21st century economy, 
the 21st century learning environment, where they are the 
interface between what people need to know and meeting people 
where they are. So anything we can do. The digital divide is 
important. We have to make sure we know in rural areas, we are 
bringing broadband that last mile, and that will open up 
incredible opportunities, especially in rural communities.
    So thank you all, and thank you, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Thank you very, very much. And I just want to just repeat 
even not only with the testimony, but with the range and 
breadth of the answers that our witnesses have given this 
morning, it really is so striking to me again about the 
consistency, the consistency of directive to all of us. The 
essential nature of community colleges and the further 
investment that we need to make because of the direction that 
our country is going in at the moment.
    And if we want to build that architecture for the future 
with regard to education, that we need to really be looking at 
the investments in what is a kind of a core and central 
component of that education. And I am most appreciative of the 
recommendations that you all have made. I think it is helpful 
in guiding us as to where we need to go when we are moving to 
put the appropriations bill together.
    This is about high-quality education and about equipping 
students with the skills that they need. One of the--I never 
got around to this question, but I would love to hear from 
folks on this. It just seems that somebody did talk about best 
practices. But there is so much out there, like the new collar 
program that we are talking about, about P-TECH and some of 
these other areas.
    Would you all think that what we needed was some sort of a 
national clearing house to know what is out there? And I know 
people talked about a skills exchange with employment, I think 
with just some central apparatus for that, but a national 
clearing house that then allows us to know what is happening in 
what State. And what are the requirements? Where is the 
flexibility? All of that which has been talked about.
    And given the universe that you--of really work with 
nontraditional students, adult learners, single parents, first-
generation college students, part-time students, low-income 
students, a more diverse student population that is out there, 
it seems to me that there is the statistic. Seventy percent of 
people in the United States do not have a 4-year college 
education.
    And while it is wonderful to get one, and we should 
continue to promote that, it isn't the end of your life if you 
don't have one or your economic well-being. And so we need to 
find the route to have people realize their dreams and their 
aspirations and their economic aspirations for themselves and 
their families.
    You face challenges juggling academic programs that the 
students face with difficulties in their lives, that whole 
range of supportive services that are critically necessary. And 
we do have Federal programs and this committee, most of these 
programs come through this committee, which is why I asked the 
question about where we try to focus our attention. And I 
appreciate your being so specific about that.
    And I believe that I can say to the committee on both sides 
of the aisle that we are committed to making strong investments 
in community colleges through the appropriations bill because 
it all leads to how people can get a shot at that American 
dream.
    So I want to just say thank you very, very much, all of 
you, for your candor, your clarity, the great work that you are 
doing in making sure that people have the opportunities that 
they need in order to succeed. And it is all about, and what 
this committee is all about in appropriations, of giving people 
the opportunity for a better chance at a better life.
    Thank you all for doing that every single day and for your 
willingness to work with us as we move forward through this 
appropriations process.
    And with that, I am going to use a remote here to call the 
adjournment of the meeting. Thank you so much. I appreciate 
your help and your time.
    And all of our members, great questions.

                                         Wednesday, April 28, 2021.

                        U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

                                WITNESS

HON. MARTIN J. WALSH, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
    The Chair. This hearing will come to order. As this hearing 
is fully virtual, we must address a few housekeeping matters. 
For today's meeting, the chair or staff designated by the chair 
may mute participants' microphones when they are not under 
recognition for the purposes of eliminating inadvertent 
background noise.
    Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves. 
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask you 
if you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate 
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
    I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock 
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to 
the next member until the issue is resolved, and you will 
retain the balance of your time. You will notice a clock on 
your screen that will show how much time is remaining. At 1 
minute remaining, the clock will turn to yellow. At 30 seconds, 
I will gently tap the gavel to remind members that their time 
is almost expired. When your time has expired, the clock will 
turn red, and I will begin to recognize the next member.
    In terms of speaking order, we will begin with the chair 
and ranking member; then members present at the time to hearing 
is called to order will be recognized in order of seniority; 
and, finally, members not present at the time the hearing is 
called to order.
    Finally, the House rules require me to remind you that we 
have set up an email address to which members can send anything 
they wish to submit in writing at any time of our hearings or 
markups. That email address had been provided in advance to 
your staff.
    Okay. With that, first of all, I am going to acknowledge 
Ranking Member Cole, but we are all going to wish Ranking 
Member Cole a happy birthday.
    So happy birthday, Tom.
    I was going to suggest that we all sing, that we sing, but 
we may spare of you that, and, in addition, to which, I would 
say, probably, everyone would say, you know, keep your day job 
and don't get into a cappella singing or so. But a very, very, 
warm, warm wishes to you, Tom, for your birthday, obviously, 
from all of us.
    So I want to say a thank you to our colleagues for joining 
this morning.
    And we want to welcome Secretary Walsh. It is really great 
to have you join our subcommittee for the very first time 
today.
    Today, April 28, in addition to being Tom Cole's birthday, 
is Workers Memorial Day, a day to honor the over 5,000 working 
people who die on the job in the United States each year. Today 
is also the 50th anniversary of the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration, OSHA, which has helped to transform 
America's workplaces and significantly reduce workplace 
fatalities, injuries, and illnesses. I am especially grateful 
that today we have Secretary Walsh with us to discuss how the 
Biden administration is helping to keep our Nation's workers 
healthy and safe.
    Secretary Walsh, I especially appreciate how your 
experiences as the son of Irish immigrants who have faced his 
fair share of hardships qualifies you as a, particularly, 
powerful voice in this discussion.
    Like you, I also have an immigrant heritage. I often tell 
the story of how my Italian-American mother worked in the old 
sweatshops, and how my friend's mother was one of the 15 people 
who died in the Franklin Street fire, a fire just down the 
street from my home, when I was barely a teenager.
    It is impossible to be an eyewitness to events like that, 
to witness the struggle of hardworking families, and not be 
touched by the gravity of our responsibility to one another, 
which is why I have long dedicated myself to fighting for 
workers' rights and workplace safety laws so that every 
American can achieve the American Dream.
    But while our Irish and Italian communities have now 
largely worked their way into the middle class, many 
communities today still face continuing obstacles, such as 
racial inequities and discrimination, that make the path to 
middle class more difficult. That is why I look forward to 
working together with you to help open the American Dream to 
all Americans.
    As the COVID-19 pandemic has devastated our economy and 
workforce, Americans across the country are struggling to make 
ends meet. In April 2020 last year, the unemployment rate in 
this country peaked at 14.8 percent, the highest since the 
Department of Labor began collecting this data in 1948.
    Meanwhile, the long-term unemployment rate, the percentage 
of people who continue to remain unemployed for 27 weeks or 
more, has increased almost fourfold, from 1.2 million in March 
2020 to 4.2 million in March 2021. And while we have seen a 
considerable decrease in overall unemployment over the past 
year, over 143,000 Connecticut residents are still without 
jobs.
    And as I have said before, we know that women and people of 
color have been disproportionately affected. For example, there 
are about 3.7 million fewer women working now than in February 
last year. And to be clear, these women are not opting out of 
the workplace; they are being pushed out by inadequate 
policies.
    Challenges like access to childcare, workplace flexibility 
are still making it much more difficult for women to reclaim 
the jobs they lost. Many have been forced to consider new 
careers because the jobs they had prior to the pandemic no 
longer exist.
    That is why I am so encouraged that you and President Biden 
have made it a priority invest in American jobs. And that means 
investing in workforce development, including sector-based 
training, apprenticeship programs, partnerships between 
institutions of higher education and employers.
    As you know, this subcommittee was instrumental in creating 
the Apprenticeship Grants Program in fiscal year 2016; has 
continued to fund this program with $185,000,000 in fiscal year 
2021. I am pleased that the President's American Rescue Plan 
and American Jobs Plan include so many critical investments for 
our Nation's workers and working families.
    The American Rescue Plan extends its emergency unemployment 
benefits to millions of families, a critical lifeline for 
American workers who are temporarily out of a job. The American 
Jobs Plan will invest in American workers by providing 
$100,000,000,000 over 10 years to strengthen our workforce, 
protect workers against wage theft and workplace 
discrimination. The American Jobs Plan also includes the 
protecting the right to organize, to PRO Act, which ensures all 
workers have a free and fair choice to join a union, strengthen 
bargaining rights for public service workers. And it includes a 
new subsidized jobs program to tackle long-term unemployment 
and underemployment.
    I am glad that President Biden's discretionary funding 
request builds on the American Rescue Plan and the American 
Jobs Plan by proposing $14,200,000,000 for 2022 for the 
Department of Labor, and that is an increase of $1,700,000,000. 
The request includes $285,000,000 for apprentice grants to 
expand access for women, for people of color, and historically 
underrepresented groups, as well as expand apprenticeships to 
new industries.
    I am encouraged that this request increases funding for 
State grants under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act 
and Wagner-Peyser. And for worker protection agencies to 
protect workers to combat wage theft and enhance worker health 
and safety.
    As you also explain further in your testimony, Mr. 
Secretary, this pandemic revealed many longstanding problems in 
the unemployment insurance system, which disproportionately 
affect workers of colors. I am pleased that this budget request 
seeks to rectify these continuing inequities.
    The investments are vital. Shining a light on these 
challenges, the subcommittee has already held hearings on 
community colleges and workplace health and safety. Two years 
ago, we also held a hearing on combating wage theft, which the 
Economic Policy Institute estimates amounts to as much as 
$50,000,000,000 stolen from workers' paychecks every year. The 
previous administration exacerbated this problem. But the Biden 
administration wisely has proposed to rescind and withdraw the 
Trump administration's joint employment and independent 
contractor rules, which were poorly drafted end runs around 
worker wage theft protections included in the Fair Labor 
Standards Act.
    I believe the Biden administration can quickly build on 
that progress by ensuring that the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration quickly issues an emergency temporary 
standard to protect workers from COVID-19, which continues to 
infect thousands of Americans each day. Establishing 
enforceable, comprehensive requirements from OSHA is the only 
way to guarantee that all workers receive protections from the 
coronavirus that will help to keep them safe. And witnesses at 
our recent hearing highlighted the importance of including 
requirements to limit airborne transmissions in the meat and 
poultry plants and to have robust protections for agricultural 
workers.
    We stand ready, I stand ready to support you and the 
administration in the work to release a strong, enforceable 
standard as soon as possible.
    Mr. Secretary, there are a lot of promising proposals, and 
we have made a lot of progress in recent months, but there is 
still much more work to be done. As F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote 
in his classic meditation on the American Dream, ``The Great 
Gatsby'': We must beat on, boats against the current, resisting 
the inclination to be borne back ceaselessly into the past.
    So I look forward to working with you as we build the 
architecture of the future, allow more people the opportunities 
to achieve the American Dream.
    And, with that, let me turn to my friend from Oklahoma, the 
Ranking Member Congressman Cole for opening remarks he may 
have.
    Mr. Cole. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for 
the robust birthday congratulations. Thank you, particularly, 
for not mentioning, as my colleagues on my side of the aisle 
often do, that I share my birthday with the late Saddam 
Hussein. So you were very generous in your omissions.
    And I would rather say before I get into any kind of 
prepared remarks, I always come to these meetings because, of 
course, it is my obligation as a ranking member, but I always 
want to see what background you choose. Today's is particularly 
colorful. It is one--where are you at? You are muted.
    The Chair. In Washington. So next time we can all gather, 
that we will be here.
    Mr. Cole. That is perfect. It is fantastic, as it always 
is, except when you are broadcasting from your conference 
hideaway in the Capitol.
    The Chair. There is nothing there at the moment.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you. It is better.
    Mr. Secretary, let me first welcome you, and a couple of 
personal remarks. We had a scheduled call, which I was unable 
to make because I was caught in cell phone hell in the rural 
part of my district where it was scheduled, and we never made 
the connection. So it is the first time we have had a chance to 
meet. But I followed your confirmation hearings with a great 
deal of interest. I know you bring a great deal to your job in 
terms of your expertise and your background, and I certainly 
look forward to working with you.
    As a matter of fact, the chairwoman made reference to your 
Irish background. Your last Democratic predecessor, Secretary 
Perez, was a particular favorite of mine because we shared an 
affection for Nicaraguan cigars. So, since you are Irish, if 
you like Guinness, Irish green ale, or Irish whiskey, we will 
have a working basis for a relationship.
    And my quarrel today with your budget insofar as we know 
it, because we haven't seen the full budget yet, is less with 
the particulars than with the overall strategy behind the 
President's domestic spending proposal.
    As I am sure you are aware, your Department is broadly in 
line with this President, has owe proposed a 16-percent 
increase in domestic spending overall and basically flat-
funding, really, inflation-adjusted, for defense. I simply 
think that is a wrong sense of priority. I think most of my 
Republican colleagues share that view. We think we live in an 
extraordinarily dangerous world right now, particularly one 
where the Russians and the Chinese are, if anything, more 
assertive, and we would argue we need to readdress the balance 
in there and the overall budget.
    There are particular areas where you will find very little 
difference between how we see the world and how you see the 
world. I am, particularly, pleased to see the robust increase 
in the apprenticeship spending. That was an area that I 
supported under President Obama. President Trump actually 
increased that with support on a bipartisan basis. I am glad to 
see you building on that as well.
    And there is a variety of other job training programs that 
I think are extraordinarily important. And, frankly, nobody is 
going to quibble with worker protection programs. They are 
necessary, and we know that that is a very important part of 
your job. So I think we will find a mixture of areas that we 
can work with you on, again, particularly in job training, 
where I think there is a strong bipartisan commitment in this 
subcommittee. We see it not only in this budget but in the 
education budget on everything from Job Corps to, again, the 
apprenticeship program to career tech kinds of programs where 
we manage to work together. And I know that is an important 
part of what you want to do, is to increase the skill sets of 
American workers so more of them can be productively employed 
and receive the wages that their hard work and expertise 
demand.
    So, again, we look forward to working with you. I am not 
going to say we agree with everything. Obviously, we will 
disagree on something like the PRO Act, where I would argue 
overturning 28 States' separately enacted right-to-work laws is 
a terrifically misplaced priority and, frankly, anti-democratic 
with a small ``d'' in my State because that was a law that was 
passed by the people of Oklahoma, not by the legislature of 
Oklahoma, in an open election. And that is the case with many 
of these laws.
    But, again, I look forward to getting to know you better. I 
look forward to working with you in the important areas that 
are under your supervision.
    One last housekeeping matter, Madam Chair, if I can. I may 
not be here at the end of the hearing. As you know, I am on the 
Rules Committee as well. And our good friend Chairman McGovern 
is holding a hearing on the challenge of hunger in America. I 
know where you would want me to be on a topic like that. So I 
will be probably here for about 90 minutes of our hearing. At 
that point, I will need to withdraw.
    But, with that, again, Mr. Secretary, welcome.
    Madam Chairman, thank you for holding the hearing, and I 
look forward to today's deliberations.
    The Chair. I thank the ranking member. And I just might 
add, probably not for the cigar smoking, but I will certainly 
be around if we can enjoy Irish whiskey or, you know, others. 
So we should be all inclusive in this area. So thank you.
    And, with that, let me just yield to the Honorable Marty 
Walsh, the Secretary of the United States Department of Labor.
    And what I want to do is to turn to my colleague, 
Congresswoman Katherine Clark of the State of Massachusetts to 
introduce the Secretary.
    Congresswoman Clark.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking 
Member Cole, and members of the subcommittee. It has been a 
great pleasure to know Secretary Marty Walsh for years as a 
friend, as a colleague in the Massachusetts House of 
Representatives, and as a partner in the fight for working 
families.
    Born and raised in Dorchester by immigrant parents, Marty 
is a second-generation union member. At age 21, he joined the 
Laborers Union Local 223 and served as the union's president 
until 2013. As mayor of Boston, he oversaw the creation of over 
140,000 jobs and helped secure a statewide $16/hour minimum 
wage, paid leave, and family leave. He also establishes 
universal pre-K for all children in Boston, and free community 
college for low-income students.
    As Secretary of Labor, he will continue to advocate for 
workers, job seekers, union members, and families. His 
dedication to working families has made him a key partner to 
President Biden in our COVID recovery as we work to get 
vaccines in arms, money in pockets, and stability back into our 
local economies.
    Marty understands that it is America's workers who keep our 
Nation running. And it is Washington's job to ensure every 
family has a fair shot at success. Without safe working 
conditions, livable wages, good union jobs, and paid family and 
medical leave, American families can't succeed; America can't 
succeed. By investing in workers, we can rebuild an even more 
equitable and thriving economy.
    Secretary Walsh, we look forward to a robust discussion 
about the needs of working families and how Congress can 
partner with you and the Department of Labor to ensure that 
workers have the support they need. Welcome to our 
subcommittee. We are so grateful to have you here today.
    Thank you, Chairwoman, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you so much.
    I would just want to associate myself with Congresswoman 
Clark's remarks. We are delighted and excited to have you here. 
And I think your background really I think reflects something 
that Frances Perkins said so many years ago, as the first head 
of the Department of Labor, and that she came to work in 
Washington for God, for FDR, and for the working men and women 
of this country.
    So we know where you are. Thank you. And, with that, let me 
let you know that your full written testimony will be included 
in the record. And you are now recognized for 5 minutes for 
your opening statement. Thank you. Hello.
    Secretary Walsh. Can you hear me?
    The Chair. We can now. Go ahead.
    Secretary Walsh. Oh, sorry. Okay. Well, I started with 
thanking you, Madam Chair, for----
    The Chair. Start again. It is all right.
    Secretary Walsh. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. I 
appreciate it. Technology is crazy.
    Thank you for the introduction. And thank you for what you 
do.
    Ranking Member Cole, thank you, and happy birthday to you.
    To my friend, Congresswoman Clark, thank you for that 
introduction. And what I said was that we are a long way from 
the third division, which is where we sat in the House of 
Representatives back in Massachusetts.
    To the members of this committee, it is a pleasure to 
appear before you for the first time, as the chairwoman said 
earlier. I look forward to outlining the Biden-Harris 
administration's vision for the Department of Labor in fiscal 
year 2022 and beyond.
    I am honored to lead the Department in its work. As I have 
said before, this is personal for me. As you heard, my parents 
both came from Ireland and immigrated from Ireland in the 
1950s. I followed my father into the labor's union. That 
journey brought me here today and made everything that I have 
in my life possible with every step. I continue to work for 
worker advocacy, worker protections, and access to good jobs. 
These, what we are talking about today, just aren't budget 
numbers to me. I know that they are not to you either. People's 
lives and dreams are at stake. And right now, our country's 
future needs these protections.
    As a pandemic has fallen, it has taken millions of lives 
and half a million Americans lives' throughout the pandemic. 
Through it all, working men and women have carried us and cared 
for us. They put their lives on the line every single day, and 
millions lost their livelihoods.
    So it is our ability to meet this historic moment. It 
depends on how we support and empower working people. Congress 
worked with President Biden to pass the American Rescue Plan, 
delivering relief for American workers and a way out of this 
pandemic. This legislation is enabling the Department of Labor 
to keep vulnerable workers safe and supported as we reopen our 
economy. But as the President has made clear, reopening isn't 
enough. We need to build back better.
    The President has proposed a bold path forward with the 
American Jobs Plan. We have got infrastructure that we need to 
win the future, and a vision to understand that a strong 
economy depends on a strong workforce. The Department of 
Labor's fiscal 2022 budget would advance this vision by 
investing in American workers. This budget requests 
$14,200,000,000 in discretionary funds and includes $3,700,000 
for job training and employment services through State formula 
grants under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and 
the Wagner-Peyser Act. It asks for $285,000,000 for registered 
apprenticeships. We request $2,100,000,000 for our worker 
protection agencies. For unemployment insurance, this budget 
fully funds and updates the States' funding formulas for the 
first time in decades. It requires $100,000,000 to develop 
technology solutions in state systems. These investments focus 
on deep needs that have been clearly needed and often cruelly 
exposed by this pandemic. But they are not new. Too many 
Americans face too many barriers to a good, safe, fairly paid 
job. People of color are held back by structural racism. Women 
have been pushed out of the workforce. Dislocated workers in 
changing industries. Our veterans, our service members, and 
military spouses facing difficult transitions. People with 
disabilities underemployed and underpaid. At-risk youth and 
justice-involved adults who need a real chance and a better 
path. The Department of Labor, with our partners, can meet 
these workers where they are, and we can train and support the 
way they need to be trained and supported so they can 
contribute their talents and join the middle class.
    I know we all know this is the right thing to do, and our 
future and our economy depends on it. The pandemic has shown 
why worker protection is a fundamental right and an essential 
function of government. As the chairwoman mentioned earlier 
today, it is Workers Memorial Day. It is a day that we honor 
thousands of workers who died on the job each year. I have had 
friends that lost their lives in working construction. It is 
truly devastating for their families, and these are largely 
preventable tragedies. Our country has made progress on 
workplace safety. But after losing hundreds of health and 
safety inspectors during our last administration, our progress 
was put at risk. These funds will allow us to hire and deploy 
staff to prevent injury, illness, and death on the job, recover 
back wages and address misclassification, respond to 
whistleblower complaints, help retirees get their benefits, and 
address pay inequities.
    The last year has also proven that unemployment insurance 
is a lifeline for millions of workers, an essential backstop 
for our economy. The pandemic shined a light also on 
longstanding problems in States' UI systems that hurt families 
and local economies. This budget would finally address them in 
a comprehensive way.
    Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member and members of this 
committee, American workers get our Nation through hard times 
like we have just been through. We need to have their backs, 
protect their rights, and get them the tools they need to build 
on our future. I look forward to working with you in 
partnership with all of you, Democrats and Republicans. And I 
know that we will have disagreements along the way, but we will 
always have conversations. We will always talk about what our 
differences are, and I am person that firmly believes there is 
always middle ground. So I am happy to answer any questions 
that you have, and I look forward to the hearing.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.
    Let me get right to it. We know the meatpacking industry 
has been pushing against an enforceable emergency temporary 
standard for COVID-19. They use these arguments that they are 
protecting workers from illness by installing flimsy plastic 
barriers, implementing, quote, ``distancing when feasible,'' 
policies. This is the same industry that succeeded in receiving 
waivers from the USDA to increase production line speeds during 
the first few months of the pandemic. They made it almost 
impossible for workers to move further apart.
    I have to be honest with you, Secretary Walsh, I am 
disappointed that the administration has yet to finalize that 
OSHA ETS to protect these workers. Can you assure me that the 
meat industry's bogus arguments, shameless lobbying are not 
behind the administration's delay in finalizing the ETS?
    Secretary Walsh. The short answer to your question, Madam 
Chair, is, yes, they are not behind this. We are going through 
a process. We went through a process, and that is exactly where 
we are moving towards. And right now, the OIRA process can 
vary, but we can't give you a deadline on when--predicted 
deadline. But right now, all that information on the ETS is at 
the White House--
    The Chair. Okay. And----
    Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Not necessarily the White 
House, but in the next step.
    The Chair [continuing]. Right. I understand. But we really 
do need--and if you can get back to us--very much as things can 
languish forever at OIRA, and we don't have forever.
    And just as a quick question here is: The industry has also 
said that the supply chain would be disrupted. Now, in 
California, Virginia have adopted their own standards. They 
don't seem to be having any problem selling steaks or 
hamburgers. Is the supply chain argument bogus or disconnected 
from reality?
    Secretary Walsh. Well, in some ways, the supply chain could 
be a real issue, but it really depends upon what mask we talk 
about. I think when we talk about--when we talk about masks, we 
talk about safety, we talk about N95s for are hospital staff, 
that is a completely different situation to what we want to do 
with masks.
    So I think that we are going to be working to make sure 
that we never leave any employee behind and put them in 
safety--and put them at risk. I just spent the last 7 years as 
mayor. I spent the year as mayor of Boston. I joined the 
pandemic--in the very beginning of the pandemic, there was some 
big issues around supply chain. That has changed. I have a mask 
right here. And the CDC has said, in some cases, you double up, 
and you do masks. So, again, this is all going to be worked out 
through the OIRA process.
    The Chair. Okay. And, please, we need a deadline on that 
and when it is coming forward.
    Let me move now to community colleges. As I mentioned, we 
had a hearing just a couple of weeks ago. From 2011 to 2014, we 
put in $2,000,000,000 community college through the Trade 
Adjustment Assistance and Community College and Career Training 
Grant, TAACCCT. And the investment supported partnerships, 
community colleges and economic sectors, to develop education, 
the training programs to ensure a skilled workforce for good 
jobs. We created a new program 2 years ago, the Strengthening 
Community Colleges Training Grant Program to return to what we 
viewed as a successful model.
    How will the Department of Labor leverage this program, 
bring it to scale to address the economic effects of the 
pandemic to support community colleges, dislocated workers, and 
their families?
    Secretary Walsh. Well, I think that that question is key to 
the success in the rebound of America right now. I think we 
have to work closely with community colleges. I have already 
had one meeting with the National Community College 
Association. As the mayor of Boston, I had very close relations 
with my community colleges in Boston. We provided free 
community college for all graduates if they chose to go to 
community college in the city of Boston. We have leveraged the 
development in the city to pay for it. And I think that that is 
a way back. And one of the things that I spoke about--well, I 
was asked often about in my confirmation hearing, from both 
Democrats and Republicans, was about doing more collaboration 
with community colleges because community colleges oftentimes 
are the industry in small communities all across America.
    So what we are going to do is the Department of Labor is 
working on these programs; that has been approved by Congress. 
And we are going to continue to strengthen those programs. And 
I think there is a tie-in as well with workforce development 
and community colleges, even a closer relationship, that we can 
train and help retrain more workers in our workforce and kids, 
young people that go to college--and older people, quite 
honestly.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I have got 
about, you know, just a few seconds left. So what I will do is 
I am going to yield back my time. And I want to get into the 
issue of IRAPs, and the, you know, just calling for an end to 
IRAPs, what the Biden administration has done, and but that 
authority still exists. So I want you to be thinking about 
that, and we will get around to that question.
    With that, I yield back, and let me recognize Congressman 
Cole.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And, again, Mr. Secretary, it is good to have you here 
today. According to a report from Government Accountability 
Office, the Department has experienced some challenges with 
assessing the impact of job training for dislocated workers 
often under programs such as the Trade Adjustment Assistance 
for Workers Program and Dislocated Worker Formula Program.
    The Department actually agreed with the GAO's 
recommendation that the agency prioritize improving the quality 
of evidence on the impact of job training for dislocated 
workers.
    It is early in your days there, I know, but have you had an 
opportunity to look into this, and what steps the DOL has made 
in response to that recommendation?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, ranking member, and, 
again, happy birthday to you today.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you.
    Secretary Walsh. You are right. I am early in my tenure 
here. This is my fifth week. But certainly I have been having 
briefings with the different departments on this. I will give 
you a more thorough answer after the hearing because I still 
have to do some work on it. But the Department's duty, as you 
know, is to support workers in our communities, even during the 
aftermath of disasters, of COVID, and other things like that. 
The grants that we are working on will impact workers and will 
help us with temporary employment. So what I would like to say 
to you today is I will try and get an answer before the hearing 
is over, but I look forward to working with you and getting a 
more thorough answer for you.
    Mr. Cole. Well, I appreciate that. And I know, again, that 
it is a bipartisan concern. We all want to get people back to 
work that have been put out.
    Let me ask you, and this also you may need to get back to 
me later. But I am going to be very shamelessly parochial here. 
A particular Air Force base is in my district, and when I talk 
to--it doesn't matter who the commanding general--it is 
actually the largest, single site employer in the State. These 
are very sophisticated air depot, 16,000 civilian jobs in 
overhauling planes. And they always tell me two things. I could 
hire every computer software engineer that could be produced in 
the State of Oklahoma by either your comprehensive [inaudible] 
And I really need cyber security experts. And you actually have 
several funds at your disposal through the H-1B application fee 
really for the purpose of retraining workers in high-skill 
areas. I certainly wouldn't expect an answer today, but I would 
love it if you would look at that. Because, I think, again, 
particularly, in the cyber securities space, all across the 
country, the need is real. It is going to continue to grow, 
and, again, these are jobs that a lot of people, I think, could 
be trained for, and it could be really helpful. So you actually 
have a pot of money where that might be something you and your 
folks would be interested in looking at. So I wanted to kind of 
put that in front of you as a suggestion.
    Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. You know, certainly, it is 
very interesting and could be a very great proposal. So I look 
forward to working on that. I actually think that in the 
economy that we are in today, after COVID, we have to think 
differently about job training. When I think about some cities 
around America, lots of tech companies moving in, lots of 
companies moving in, as we think about retraining workers, we 
should train them in these different industries, whether it is 
cyber security or other places like that.
    And so I look forward to, not just working with you, but 
other members of the committee. And I have asked my team here 
to look at some of the job training stuff, to think outside the 
box a little bit. Not so much this, I don't mean to say, like 
there is the same ole, same ole, but let's think outside the 
box. It could be--because there are lot pockets of industry 
like you have in your district and other people have in their 
district that having a job training program or access to 
funding to help build up skills for cities and towns that, I 
think, a lot of cities and towns would welcome that, as well as 
mayors and Governors would welcome that as well.
    Mr. Cole. Yeah, I agree. There would be a lot of bipartisan 
support for an issue like that.
    The last question here because of the short time, the 
budget outline mentions an update for the formula for 
determining the amount States receive to administer 
unemployment insurance, as well as significant investments in 
unemployment insurance administration information technologies. 
Can you give us a little bit more detail--and, again, it is 
early, you may not have developed all of the specifics yet as 
the targets of these investments--in other words, what will the 
updated formula look like, how will the investments in 
information technology address fraud and unemployment systems?
    But I know in my own State, you know, we were almost 
overwhelmed by the pandemic in terms of the unemployment needs. 
And, you know, again, they did the best they could, but they 
simply didn't have the technology or the personnel they needed 
for the extraordinary situation, like all of us that is running 
our States.
    Secretary Walsh. No, you are absolutely right. And I think 
that 30 million Americans were unemployed last March. That 
overwhelmed the system as a whole, in Massachusetts as well. 
And I think that, you know, between the money that is invested 
in the American Rescue Plan and some of the money that we are 
looking for in this budget, I think we are going to take a deep 
look into all UI. I know, later on the conversation, I am sure 
fraud will come up. But it was a safety net for a lot of 
people. It kept food on the table. It kept a roof over their 
head. And there is lots of different aspects. And we are going 
to look at the different answers. How we can work with the 
States--I know my time is up. If you give me 2 more, 10 more 
seconds. Working with the States and strengthening their 
systems, but also working here at the DOL to figure out how do 
we make sure something like this--what the problems we have 
experienced don't happen----
    Mr. Cole. Yeah.
    Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Again. So, again, that is 
another issue that--I know that it is an issue for almost every 
single Member of Congress. It is an issue, probably, for 50 
Governors, and it is an issue for 180 million Americans for the 
future.
    Mr. Cole. Well, fraud can always be a problem, but I 
certainly agree with your basic point that this was a program 
that was needed that helped a lot people that really needed the 
help at the time. So I am just trying to figure out how to 
administer better going forward. But I don't have any 
complaints with what we did and how the Department performed 
under difficult situations.
    With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. And let me now yield to Congresswoman 
Barbara Lee.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you for 
this hearing. Good morning, everyone.
    And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being with us today. 
Congratulations. A couple things I want to ask you. One is you 
mentioned the issue of structural racism, and I think this 
administration gets it. I mean, when you look at even, I think, 
the unemployment rate is now, what, 5.4 percent for White 
workers, 9.6 percent unemployment rate for Blacks, African 
Americans, and about 7.9 percent--I think these numbers--for 
Latinos--are fairly accurate. But bottom line is there have 
been many Secretaries who I have asked to submit a report to 
this committee on for, and they have never submitted it.
    So I just want to ask you, and you mentioned structural 
racism, how do you see the barriers to employment or within the 
Department of Labor? And how do you dismantle those barriers as 
you move forward on your equity agenda to make sure that there 
are policies and a budget--and budget priorities to make sure 
that these unemployment rates are closed and that people of 
color are employed without the--and we know the structural 
racism. So you will have to dismantle the barriers first.
    Then, secondly, and let me just ask you, is Executive Order 
11246 still on the books? That was President Johnson's 
executive order that prohibits Federal contractors from 
discriminating against people of color, people--I believe the 
language is sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national 
orientation. And it was designed to expand opportunities for 
people who had been shut out of the employment sectors, all of 
the sectors in our country. So is that still on the books? And 
if so, are you looking at Executive Order 11246 to begin to use 
that to prohibit discrimination?
    Secretary Walsh. Yes, and it is--I always have been told it 
is OFCCP's jurisdiction, and is on the books--
    Ms. Lee. Yes.
    Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Yes. It is on the books.
    Ms. Lee. It is. Okay. Have you looked at how you are going 
to use it? I don't think it has been used much in the past.
    Secretary Walsh. No, I haven't, and I will----
    Ms. Lee. Okay.
    Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Thank you for that----
    Ms. Lee. And what about----
    Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Sorry. Thank you for the 
question. Let me start with the first part of your question. 
How do you deal with structural racism? I think it is 
leadership. I think it is empowering people that--when I say 
empowering people that I work with. I think it is coming up 
with a comprehensive plan. And I do agree with you have to have 
benchmarks and you have to have reports because if we don't 
give a report to someone, then it will linger on and not move 
forward.
    I think when we think about equity, we think about equity 
in procurements, that is a big issue that I work with in the 
city of Boston, that we didn't do a great job with. We put down 
a good system, but I learned a lot of lessons from that 
opportunity. We learned about creating opportunities and 
pathways for people to be able to get into the middle class. 
And I think you start in departments. I think I start here at 
the Department of Labor.
    When I talk about structural racism, and I talk about 
opportunities, I think if we don't create them within the 
Department of Labor, how can I go out and talk to employers 
around America and tell a story to them, ``This is what I 
expect you to do, but I am doing it myself''? And I think that 
that is something that is really important that we have done. 
And I have learned that over the last bunch of years as an 
elected official.
    And I think that we have unique opportunity right now. I 
know in the Department of Labor, almost every single 
conversation that we have, whether we are talking about a 
policy, or we are talking about how we are moving forward, we 
are talking equity inclusion, we are talking about structural 
racism, we are talking about all the issues. It has become part 
of the conversation. It is not just brought up when I am in 
front of a camera and I am doing a hearing in front of 
Congress. When the camera shuts off and I talk to my team, we 
are talking about it all the time.
    So I think there is--we have a real opportunity--and 
because of COVID, because of COVID--and we all know this; it is 
no secret--COVID put a bigger spotlight on structural racism in 
our country. And we have to start addressing it, not by giving 
speeches--and I am talking about me--we have to start 
addressing it by actually policy and making some real strong 
changes in the workforce.
    So that is what I plan on doing. And if you ask me for a 
report, I don't know what my predecessors did, I will give you 
a report. You ask me to come your office, I will come to your 
office. You want to shoot me a phone call, I will do whatever 
it is, and I will tell you our progress. And if our progress 
isn't good, I will tell you our progress isn't good. And if our 
progress is good, that is for you to decide to tell me you are 
doing okay.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I am really happy to 
hear that because this is--you have such an important role in 
our economy and in ensuring that people are employed with good-
paying jobs, but also with apprenticeship programs, for 
example, there is so many barriers with people of color to 
enter into apprenticeship programs. So I assume that this is 
also part of what you are talking about and how we eliminate 
those barriers and make sure there is no discrimination and 
that there are opportunities for people of color in 
apprenticeship programs?
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah, I know. I have a strong history of 
that, of breaking down those barriers. I am not going to get 
into it right now, unless you want me to. But I created 
opportunities in Boston to do things. And the opportunities I 
brought were--we can scale out them. And one of those 
opportunities was a program--I want to briefly talk about 
this--called Operation Exit I created as mayor of the city of 
Boston. It was a 3-week career apprenticeship program. The 
people that went into that program, most of them had been 
incarcerated. Some of them had bracelets on their--some of them 
had court cases open. Some of them were gang-involved people. 
And the success of that program has been unbelievable. And I 
would like to take that program and scale it up in Boston. I 
think we have about 104 people that have gone through that 
program. It proves it works. And we can take that program 
around the country with the help of the Department of Labor, 
but also with the help of industry.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, again. Thank you, Madam Chair. I look 
forward to working with you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you.
    The Chair. Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
    And thank you, Mr. Secretary. Congratulations, again. 
Thanks for the courtesy call last week. Let me follow up on a 
topic we talked about on that call, the H-2B visas. As you 
know, Ms. Pingree and I moved the--included amendments that 
allowed the Secretary of Homeland Security after consultation 
with the Secretary of Labor to issue additional visas. Now the 
Department of Labor has already certified the need for 127,000, 
and yet only 22,000 additional ones were issued. So can you 
just let me know, were you consulted by Secretary Mayorkas, and 
if you were, what was your recommendation for the number of 
additional visas to issue under the amendment?
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah, let me get the information on the 
amendment, but I have been talking to Secretary Mayorkas. We 
have had several conversations about this. We are working 
through the process. I had a meeting yesterday with some people 
on my team talking about the regulation around the additional 
visas that will be allocated. I don't have the exact number in 
front of me right now, but I can get the number for you. 
Actually, I do have the number, 22,000----
    Mr. Harris. Right.
    Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Additional visas will be 
there. Yesterday, we had a meeting, you had talked to me about, 
I believe, the crab processing plant that you have in your 
district. I have also gotten calls from several Senators and 
Congressman Keating and other folks. So we had a meeting 
yesterday and trying to move that long. Those regulations 
should be done shortly. And it goes on to the next step. So I 
don't see much further delay in this other than just getting 
the regulation together.
    Mr. Harris. Yeah, and, again, you know, the Department of 
Labor has certified the need for about 130,000. We are only 
going to get 88,000. So, you know, I am hopeful that the 
Department of Labor can have more input into that process of 
determining the number of additional visas because your 
department has already gone through the legwork of figuring out 
what is necessary.
    Let me just bring up one other topic, the ERISA standalone 
telehealth benefit. You know that, during COVID, ERISA 
employers were allowed to provide standalone benefits to people 
for telehealth for temporary workers and other people who 
didn't qualify for full benefits. Is that something that the 
Department is considering extending based on experience with 
the telehealth standalone benefit?
    Secretary Walsh. Congressman, if you don't mind, I haven't 
heard about this before. But, respectfully, I ask if I could 
get--either call you with the answer or in writing to you. It 
is the first time I have heard this.
    Mr. Harris. Okay. No, that will be great. And I appreciate 
it. You know, you are drinking from a firehose right now. No 
question about it.
    With regard to the minimum wage, I know the President is 
new--wants to advance the minimum wage, but there is great 
concern from especially small businesses and restaurants in my 
district about the--including the tipped minimum wage, about 
raising tipped minimum wage because the statistics are that 
most people who are getting paid under the tipped minimum wage 
actually earn more than the minimum wage when tips are entered 
in or included. And our businesses that are small businesses, 
especially restaurants, that were so damaged under COVID have 
told me if they have to pay a minimum wage to their tipped 
employees, you know, they will just close up; they will go out 
of business. They can't afford to do it. The market will not 
bear that.
    So considering that tipped minimum wage employees earn more 
than the minimum wage when you include tips, is this something 
that you would consider, you know, separating out from the 
minimum wage discussions that are going to, you know, go 
forward in the next few months?
    Secretary Walsh. Again, that is an issue that we have had 
many conversations about. And I don't think there has been any 
final decisions on where we go--where we are going with this. I 
have heard from both sides of--I won't say the aisle. When I 
say ``aisle,'' I am not talking Democrats or Republicans--from 
restaurant people. I have gotten some calls from Boston, 
saying, you know: Don't change the rule, the rule is great. And 
I have gotten restaurants in Boston saying that, workers 
saying: The rule isn't great.
    So we are doing--I am doing a deep dive on this to look to 
see what is best way to move forward. So I have not personally 
made a final decision, not that it is necessarily all my 
decision, obviously, but I am going to--we are going to 
continue to have conversations around this.
    Mr. Harris. No, I appreciate that, and thank you. Because, 
again, in other areas of the country, you know, my rural areas, 
you know, that, you know, $15 minimum wage for tipped employees 
would be very harmful to our small businesses.
    Finally, one last issue, and I read with interest your 
testimony, I mean, of supporting good union jobs. And I believe 
every American has the right to be in a union. These are good-
paying jobs. Do you have concern that the Keystone XL pipeline 
cancellation canceled, you know, basically canceled 10,000 
union jobs. The four big unions were supporters of it. I think 
it is an energy independence issue. It is a high-paying 
American job issue. Did that give you a little heartburn?
    Secretary Walsh. One of those four unions that had a 
problem with it is LIUNA, Labors International Union of North 
America, which I am I member of. But inside the American Jobs 
Plan, there is money in there for workforce development and job 
training. And I do feel we have an opportunity at this moment 
in time to train and retrain some of our workers in those 
different industries for the green economy and the tech 
economy. There is lots of opportunities there. So I think, 
again, we will be having probably many conversations about 
that, but at some point I do think we have look at the job 
training because these jobs President spoke about the other 
day, the green jobs, they can be good-paying jobs and put lots 
of Americans to work.
    Mr. Harris. All right. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    The Chair. Congressman Pocan.
    Mr. Pocan. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And welcome, Mr. Secretary. Sorry I missed our call last 
week, but I do want to let you know I am a 30-year member of 
IUPAT, Painters in Allied Trades, and cofounder of the Labor 
Caucus. We look forward to working with you on moving things 
forward.
    First, I just want to say I completely agree with the chair 
of the committee who has brought up the issue around OSHA and 
meatpacking. And whatever we can do to get that resolved. I am 
still stunned that JBS was only fined $15,000 for its lack of 
COVID safety protocols after six workers died at a Colorado 
plant. The average funeral was more than they were fined, and 
they are a $50,000,000,000 profitable company. So, clearly, 
that is important to a lot of us.
    Let me ask you a question about Amazon. You know, last 
year, a lot of people were overcome by the pandemic. And people 
were trying to put, struggling to put food on their tables. 
Amazon reported its best year ever, shattering records and 
reporting an astronomical annual profit of $21,300,000,000. And 
yet, despite their exploding profits, Amazon has repeatedly 
flouted worker safety rules and shown little care for its 
workers and their well-being.
    Most recently, their terrible treatment of their employees 
was highlighted when drivers and warehouse workers leaked, no 
pun intended, that because of their schedules they are put on, 
they can't even take bathroom breaks and are forced to urinate 
in bottles and defecate in bags.
    Amazon tried to deny it, originally, on Twitter, until so 
many people put actual photos of employees of what they had to 
do. They had to apologize because those claims are true.
    What steps can the Department of Labor take to ensure that 
companies like Amazon are held accountable for their 
mistreatment of workers? And I am hoping that we are going to 
commit to direct the Department of Labor to investigate claims 
from workers like those at Amazon about their working 
conditions.
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you.
    Thank you, Congressman, for that. And I didn't realize you 
were a member of the Painters. So it is great to have a fellow 
trade person on a Zoom call.
    When you think about--when I think about whether it is the 
workers at Amazon or any other workers in America, it really is 
about strengthening up our enforcement.
    When I became the Secretary of Labor, we looked at OSHA. We 
found that we were down almost 200 inspectors. We look at wage 
and hour; we are down inspectors. It really is about building 
up enforcement. And I don't mean just to enforce when something 
bad happens, but it would be great to get to a point where we 
are working collaboratively with employers on the way how to 
treat employees fairly.
    So the enforcement aspect of it is the best way we can do 
it. And as we move forward here in the next coming months, we 
are going to be hiring people and training them, getting them 
ready so we can get them out on the job sites across America. 
Right now, quite honestly, we don't have enough inspectors to 
be able to inspect every single complaint that comes into OSHA 
or anything in the Department of Labor, quite honestly. So we 
really have to build up our strength there.
    Mr. Pocan. Great. Well, thank you. You know, also, since 
the National Labor Relations Act was passed in 1935, 86 years 
ago, there really haven't been any major pro-worker labor laws 
that have been passed. And as a result, I think we have seen 
corporations chip away at the middle class over the last 
several decades. You know, now more than ever, it is important 
that we update our labor laws and empower the Department of 
Labor to protect our workers. Given the emergence of the 
megacorporations like Amazon, 50 percent of all e-commerce 
sales, 5 percent of all retail sales in country, given the rise 
of the gig economy, what can we do, besides the PRO Act that we 
passed out of the House, to continue to make sure that workers 
no matter in what format they are working have rights that 
unfortunately we have seen erode especially in the last 4 
years?
    Secretary Walsh. I think that we have to stop looking at 
worker protection as antibusiness, and it isn't. It is pro-
employee. And many of the people, all the employees that we are 
talking about, we represent them one way or the other. And so I 
think that that is number one. I think that would be important 
for us to move forward, yes. And, two, an educational component 
of it. I think we have educate people as well as how to make 
sure that we treat our employees right. When it comes to 
misclassification and independent contracting, those folks 
retreat as employees. They should get the same protection and 
the same benefits an employee does because they are providing 
the same services as other employees in other industries. So I 
think that we are going to have many conversations about this. 
And I think we get stuck up on one or two certain company 
names, and saying, oh, my God, this industry, we can't change 
it. It is not about the industry; it is about the employee. It 
is about making sure we treat the American worker correctly. 
And, again, I think that the biggest thing I would say is that 
worker rights are not antibusiness. So we want to see business 
succeed, and I want to see business succeed because business 
employs employees, and we need to continue to work together and 
not draw lines in the sand.
    Mr. Pocan. Great.
    Two seconds back. I yield back, Madam Chair, thank you. 
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    The Chair. I thank the gentleman.
    Now let me now recognize Congressman Fleischmann.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Secretary, I have been actually participating in two 
hearings concurrently. I am the ranking member on Homeland 
Security, but I wanted to let you know that I wanted to take 
the time to speak with you today, first and foremost, to 
congratulate you on your appointment, and to thank you for the 
very kind phone call you made to me last week. I think we had a 
very good, deep conversation about a lot of things and, of 
course, about some very important things like baseball as well. 
So I wish you every success in your endeavors, sir.
    The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
Program was intended to correct decades-old injustices 
perpetrated on the Department of Energy employees, such as 
uranium, miners, millers, and oil transporters, to ensure that 
they receive fair compensation for illnesses incurred on the 
job. The reality is that the program is a far cry from what the 
workers and their advocates envisioned. Some decisions made by 
the DEEOIC for this program have been contrary to the letter 
and spirit of the original law.
    The program was intended to be a claimant-friendly process. 
Unfortunately, bureaucratic red tape has restricted these 
benefits from our sick nuclear workers and their survivors. And 
as you may know I represent the Oak Ridge Reservation, but 
there are several DOE reservations affected by this agency.
    My question, sir, my first question, stakeholders feel that 
the final rule proposed in 2015 and published in 2019 are more 
restrictive than the previous regulations and the statute 
itself. What are your thoughts on rescinding the rules and 
entering into a negotiated rulemaking process with stakeholder 
representatives, sir?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Congressman, for your 
question. Thank you also for the conversation the other day. I 
don't have a lot of information about that rule in front of me, 
but, certainly, the way you just explained it to me, the 
intention is to help the worker, and I absolutely will make 
that a priority of mine. Actually, people in the room right 
now, they will probably want to find out what is going on. I 
will make it a priority of mine right now to see, how do we 
strengthen that? There shouldn't have been anything that was 
worker protection or helping workers that shouldn't--the 
intention behind it should have been to help workers. And if 
that is not what happened, then that is something that we have 
to fix. And I will work with you on that. And I will try to 
find an answer before the hearing is over. I apologize. This is 
the first I have heard of it.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir. And as a followup to that. And 
it is a very niche thing on DOE areas, of course. These are men 
and women, overwhelmingly good, strong union workers who for 
years worked around some very dangerous substances, like 
beryllium, and things like that. And they have been adversely 
affected, and many are sick, and we just try to get them that 
compensation.
    A followup question that we can get information on, during 
the advisory board on toxic substance and worker health meeting 
last week, this DEEOIC notified the board that they will be 
provided with a support contractor. I think that is a good step 
in the right direction. My question for you will be then--and I 
will await an answer when you can look into it--how long do you 
anticipate the procurement process to take before the board 
receives the much-needed assistance?
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah, thank you for that. I will get back 
to you on that too. I will look into that. You know, I have had 
some good briefings about black lung and some other illnesses 
that get workers sick. And this is one area that was not 
touched upon. Maybe it is because it is a unique area. But it 
is certainly something--and I will also look into other areas 
of safety for workers that I am part of what you ask me today 
just to make sure the Department is doing everything they can. 
A worker is a worker, and illnesses are illnesses. Just because 
something gets more play in the press, it doesn't mean we 
shouldn't look at the other issues. Let me look at that, and I 
promise I will get back to you on that.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir. And concluding, I am just going 
to say I have worked very hard on computer science literacy. I 
see my friend and colleague, Ms. Lee, as well, she has worked 
on that as well with a lot of companies. I look forward to 
working with you so that we can expand computer science 
literacy, not only to inner city America but also to rural 
America for education and for workforce development.
    And, with that, Madam Chair, I will yield back, and I thank 
you.
    Secretary Walsh. Let me just quickly respond to that. I 
have already had a meeting with Secretary Raimondo from 
Commerce and Secretary Cardona from Education to talk about how 
do we partner the three of us together to expand some 
opportunities. And computer science can be one of those areas 
that we could all fall into because of the Commerce, the Labor, 
and the Education.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, sir. Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. I have just been informed that there 
is a series of tech issues that we are having here, and that is 
with the livestream. So I just want to let folks know and Mr. 
Secretary and members that I have been told that we need to 
pause a few minutes. I hope it is a shorter period of time. I 
apologize, Congresswoman Clark, as you are next, but this is--I 
am taking the advice from the techies here in terms of what we 
need to do to get the hearing livestreamed. So I hope it is 
shorter period of time than that. But we will be right back to 
you. So thank you. Thank you for your indulgence.
    [Recess.]
    The Chair. Hi, this is the chair. I am waiting to get some 
indication of--it is the livestream mechanism that apparently 
isn't working. We have an issue with whether or not, if you 
don't livestream, if there is a compliance issue with the House 
rules, and et cetera, trying to get very quickly a 
determination and to figure out how we can proceed. So 
apologies while waiting for an answer, so I will be back as 
quickly as I can. Sorry. Sorry, Mr. Secretary. Sorry to my 
colleagues.
    Secretary Walsh. Madam Chair, no worries. It is not your 
fault. Technology.
    Ms. Clark. Rosa? I have an event with my virtual guest at 
11:30. It is going to be about 10 minutes. Do you think I 
should do that now or----
    The Chair. Well, why don't you go ahead and do it and then 
get back, and we will--you know, I will get you. I am waiting 
now for a call back as to whether or not--they are checking 
with Congressman Cole and others, et cetera--with Congresswoman 
Granger--if we can proceed forward. But why don't you go--what 
time is it now actually?
    Ms. Clark. It is 11:30.
    The Chair. Okay. Go do it and then come back, and we will 
make sure that you get your questions in. Okay?
    Ms. Clark. Okay.
    The Chair. All right. Thank you. And then I know 
Congressman Cole has to leave as well, so anyway. So sorry, 
okay.
    Hi. We are back, Mr. Secretary. So what we are going to do 
is to proceed with the hearing, and we will post it at the 
conclusion so as to be in concert with rules.
    So, with that, let me--Ms. Frankel, Congresswoman Frankel.
    Ms. Frankel. I am here. I am getting my act together. Okay.
    The Chair. Okay.
    Ms. Frankel. Here we go. Hello. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, 
Madam Chair, Mr. Secretary. Nice to see you all. I see that 
little girl. She is so cute. Okay.
    Mr. Secretary, thank you. I enjoyed our conversation last 
week, and I know you are ready for my questions, and 
congratulations, you sound like the right person for this job.
    So I am not going to go through all the statistics that our 
chair ably did about women being out of work. We know they have 
been hit the hardest by this pandemic, especially 
disproportionately women of color. Millions lost their jobs. 
Millions of jobs have disappeared.
    And, you know, I think our President is the right person, 
you know, to get us moving forward. I love his plans, his job 
plan. I love the, what I expect will be part of the family 
plan.
    What is concerning to me is that he talks about them as two 
separate plans because I think it is very important that we get 
people back to work, and that means women getting back to work. 
So that we shouldn't have one job plan that gets mostly men 
back to work and then have a separate job plan that maybe is 
going to get women back to work.
    And so I want to talk about that, and I also want to talk 
about what has happened in the childcare industry. I know--I am 
hoping Katherine Clark is going to do that too, but there is 
obviously a crisis. We just lost a lot of centers and slots 
because people were not using childcare, and so we know this: 
Parents can't go back to work if we don't have childcare.
    And we also know that childcare is a great industry for--
especially for moms to work in if we can get their salaries up, 
which is what we absolutely should do. And shortchanging women 
is not just about the women; it is about shortchanges to 
families they support, the men in their families, families 
having to work two or three jobs.
    So let me just start with your comment, because in terms of 
how we are going to make sure that, as we move the President's 
packages along, women are all going to get jobs, because--one 
more thing is this: What I am concerned is by having two 
funding, funding the jobs program one way, the family plan 
another way, that women are going to be left out.
    So my question to you is, how are you going to make sure 
that women are going to get back into this job market, that 
they are going to be paid fairly, and that we are going to 
restore our childcare industry, and make sure that we are 
training enough moms or people who want to be childcare 
workers?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Congresswoman, and 
thank you for your conversation the other day and your interest 
in pushing us.
    First, I just want to say, the Women's Bureau is the only 
Federal office exclusively focused with serving and promoting 
the interest of women in the workforce. So, within the 
Department of Labor, we are the only office that exclusively is 
focused on women in the workforce. If I have time, I will go 
through some of the areas that the Women's Bureau is focused 
on.
    Number two, you know, I don't look at--I don't think we 
should look at the two plans the President put forth--or 
actually three plans, the Rescue Plan, the Jobs Plan, or the 
Families Plan, as three individual plans. They all collectively 
work together. And in the Jobs Plan, there is money in there 
for workforce development. There is money in for the care 
economy. When I say the care economy, I am not just talking 
about strengthening the employees that work in the Jobs Plan 
but also creating opportunities.
    You are absolutely 100 percent right when you said that 
many of our childcare facilities might not come back after the 
pandemic. They lost their revenue. They lost their support. 
They lost their kids. And the women that left the workforce, 
some of those families are never going to go back into 
childcare. We need to get them back in. It is important for our 
economy to get----
    Ms. Frankel. I am sorry. I am so rude to interrupt you, I 
know, but I only have a few seconds. Here is what I would 
really appreciate--I think this is important--is that you 
analyze the so-called Jobs Plan how many women you believe are 
going to get back into the workforce with that plan versus the 
family plan. And let's stop calling, truthfully, one a Jobs 
Plan and one a family plan, because what I see in the family 
plan, what I expect is a Jobs Plan.
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah.
    Ms. Frankel. And I just really would like you to start 
thinking about that because otherwise I think women are going 
to just be left out.
    Secretary Walsh. Okay. No, I will, and we will get numbers 
on that for you.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you, sir.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And thank you, Secretary, for reaching out to all of us. I 
really appreciate that. I know you have more than a few things 
on your plate. So it is very honorable for you to reach out and 
start the conversation. Even though I know, even on the other 
side of the aisle, we are going to have a lot of disagreements, 
I just really appreciate that. I think it is nice to see those 
types of things being restored.
    I wanted to ask--now, this is a little bit of a harder 
issue. You know, obviously, the pandemic exposed the fact that 
our unemployment system is inefficient and seriously 
underprepared to respond to crises. And I know that State 
agencies were given a very large task in this last year to 
administer benefits to millions of people.
    And I have got to tell you, whether--every day in my 
office, I hear--would hear from single parents or a pregnant 
woman or a senior who waited for hours on the phone to have 
their call dropped or their identities were stolen. No joke. 
There is a class action suit started in Washington State. I 
mean, it was just horrific. Over a billion dollars was 
basically given away to fraud, and I think those weaknesses in 
our system really impacted the most vulnerable folks.
    Recently, the Department of Labor OIG issued a memorandum 
that stated that the employment and training administration 
needs to take immediate action to ensure State agencies 
implement effective controls to mitigate fraud and improper 
payments. OIG estimated that the improper payments could be 
around $89 billion with a significant portion of that being due 
to fraud. Again, it was $1.1 billion in my own State of 
Washington.
    And despite that fraud, the individual who is now in charge 
of the Department of Labor program that oversees unemployment 
insurance benefits is Suzi LeVine, who was the head of 
Washington's unemployment--or ESD when it gave away those 
billions of dollars, and it was a very frustrating experience 
across the board. It was a very bipartisan frustration with 
what we felt like someone who was put in place to do a job she 
just was not equipped to do.
    I know a number of us sent a letter alerting you to those 
concerns as she was being now put on the Federal--in that same 
role on the Federal level. But I raise all this because I don't 
want to see what happened in Washington State happen on the 
national level. And I wanted to see, you know, in your budget 
proposal, it doesn't mention integrity measures or fraud 
prevention, or at least if it does, I didn't see it. And 
unemployment is a high error program, but I need to know from 
you that you are going to not allow this to happen nationwide 
and kind of what measures you are going to be putting in 
place--maybe I just missed it in the budget--to attack this 
problem.
    Secretary Walsh. No, thank you very much for your question 
and your concern. As I said earlier, just to kind of recap real 
quickly, last March, 30 million Americans kind of were 
unemployed at one time. In my own State of Massachusetts, you 
know, we didn't have enough people to be able to take the 
requests that came in. The city of Boston partnered with the 
State, with my Governor to help with call takers and to better 
kind of put these processes in place.
    I wasn't the Secretary of Labor last year. I wish I was 
because, as these problems were coming in, as Secretary of 
Labor, I would have intervened with States all across America, 
and I would have said, how do we help with the distribution of 
the benefits, and how do we make sure we are catching the 
fraud? So I think there is a lot of opportunity here. We could 
point at different people for whatever happened.
    But moving forward, later on today, I have a meeting with 
my folks at UI to talk about fraud and to talk about some of 
the things that happened and how we move forward. But as we 
think about investing the $2 billion into fixing the system, I 
believe there is something like $600 million, $700 million that 
is going to go into technical support for States, and there is 
going to be other money that is going to go into other ways of 
helping.
    So fraud needs to be at the forefront of this, to eliminate 
fraud in the system. Integrity needs to be put back in the 
system. The people that collected unemployment insurance feel 
confident when they get the check finally, but many of them 
waited months or weeks and months to get the check. So we have 
to put integrity back in the system.
    You have my commitment, 100 percent of my commitment that 
this will be one of the top areas that I work on as the 
Secretary of Labor to make sure that something like this 
doesn't happen. God forbid we have a pandemic in the future, 
that something like this happens, but we have to have a system 
that works for everyone.
    In 2008, when we had a recession in the country, there was 
issues with unemployment, I believe, back then. There was 
issues in 2020. And we have to make sure our--future looking, 
that we don't have issues in the system. So I look forward to 
working with you, and I also look forward to working with this 
Congress in order to pass--if we have to pass legislation, we 
pass legislation, but to take the issues in UI out of them.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. I appreciate that. And you are right, 
we had those problems in 2008, and Congress thought it took 
steps to fix it, and so, when it happened again in 2020, it was 
frustrating. So I appreciate your emphasis on this because I 
don't want to be here again.
    And thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you.
    The Chair. Let me inquire, is Congresswoman Clark back?
    Ms. Clark. I am.
    The Chair. Okay. You are on, Congresswoman Clark.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you, Chairwoman DeLauro.
    And thank you again, Secretary Walsh, for joining us.
    I want to follow up on some of the questions from 
Congresswoman Frankel. As we know, and I know you understand, 
that women have borne the brunt of this pandemic's weight, from 
taking on more child and family care responsibilities to 
disproportionately serving in some of the most dangerous roles 
as healthcare workers and other frontline workers.
    This year has been extremely difficult for women in the 
workforce. A sociologist, Jessica Calarco, summed it up well 
when she said: Other countries have social safety nets. The 
United States has women.
    As a result, a disrespect loss of jobs for women and in 
particular women of color have arisen throughout this pandemic. 
In December, the economy lost a net 140,000 jobs, and every 
single one of those jobs belonged to a woman.
    I would like to know, to follow up, I know from your work 
on universal pre-K in the city of Boston that you understand 
that there isn't a hierarchy of infrastructure, that childcare 
is as valuable to getting our workforce going, to growing jobs, 
and to making sure that we get women back into the workforce 
and get us out of this 33-year low we have in workforce 
participation.
    Can you expand a little on your approach and that of 
President Biden as equating the Families Plan that we are going 
to hear more details about tonight and the Jobs Plan and how 
they really are one infrastructure investment?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Congresswoman, for 
your question. I hear background. I don't know if that is me.
    I think, first and foremost, I think in the American Jobs 
Plan, when the President is recommending allocating $400 
billion to the care economy, the issue around women in the 
workforce is also a bigger issue because you have women who are 
paid less than men; you have women of color paid less than 
White women; you have Latino and African American paid less. 
So, in the Jobs Plan, a lot of that is addressed. It is about 
raising wages for women that work in that particular industry, 
but it is also about creating opportunity.
    The Women's Bureau, if you could bear with me for 2 
minutes--or 1 minute here because we only have 2 minutes. The 
Women's Bureau has designed four goals to respond to the 
current conditions that women face navigating the pandemic 
recovery and economic recovery: Disrupt occupational 
segregation and get more women pathways to good jobs, Jobs Plan 
and the American Families Plan will address that; reducing 
penalties for women in low-paid work by expanding access to 
paid leave, medical leave, paid sick, sick days, childcare, 
eldercare; closing the gender gaps in programs like 
Unemployment Insurance; and eliminating the gender-based 
discrimination in the workplace through policies and practices 
that promote equal pay and confront sexual harassment in the 
workplace, pregnancy discrimination, disability and sexual 
orientation and gender identity related discrimination.
    All of this has to be done together. We can't just do one 
aspect and not the other, as you know that. Even in our time in 
the legislature, we passed lots of pay equity bills, but we 
didn't--in Massachusetts, but we didn't change the narrative, 
and we have to be laser focused on how do we change the 
narrative. So that is some of the stuff--I don't want to take 
your time. I will go back to you, and I can answer more 
questions later as well.
    Ms. Clark. Specifically earlier you raised the issue around 
apprenticeships and high-quality registered apprenticeships, 
and we know that women and people of color have often faced 
barriers into accessing those programs. Do you plan to engage 
with these communities as we look to the future of our 
workforce, in particular with these apprenticeship programs?
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah, I think we have to engage with the 
stakeholder community, and we also have to engage in the 
apprenticeship programs to make sure that people understand how 
do they access these jobs, how do they access these programs, 
and what are the barriers there. And, quite honestly, some of 
the barriers are childcare. So we need to make sure that, as we 
set up these apprenticeship programs, there is an opportunity 
for childcare.
    Construction industry is the best example. We don't have 
childcare. Boston is doing a pilot right now. The building 
trades is doing a pilot to create childcare opportunities in 
the city. If that works, we can take that, scale it across the 
country, and make it work for women so that the barrier isn't 
childcare.
    Ms. Clark. In my last 20 seconds, going back to the 
opportunity to create good-paying green jobs, what do you say 
to workers in the fossil fuel industry who are concerned about 
the vast potential for work in Biden's Jobs Plan?
    Secretary Walsh. There is great, good-paying jobs coming 
down the road from the clean energy sector. These are good 
jobs. Some of these jobs are construction jobs. Some of these 
jobs are tech jobs. Some of these jobs are retrofitting jobs, 
and we need American workers to do those jobs.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you, Secretary Walsh.
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Clark. And I yield back.
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congressman Cline.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you, Ranking Member Cole.
    Secretary Walsh, thank you for being here. While, 
unfortunately, we don't have President Biden's complete budget 
to allow us to fully discuss the funding needs and oversight 
that this committee will be working on, I appreciate the 
information on funding levels you provided in your testimony 
and look forward to reviewing the completed budget when it is 
released.
    Many from my local chambers of commerce have voiced 
significant concerns with legislation such as the PRO Act, 
which I have consistently voted against during my time on the 
House Education and Labor Committee and on the floor. My home 
State of Virginia being right to work is one of the reasons it 
has been named as the best State to do business by CNBC, but 
now both Federal and State laws are threatening this.
    Every American should have the right to get and hold a job 
free from their requirement that they join a labor union. The 
PRO Act would preempt and prohibit that right. Workers, quite 
frankly, deserve more. What will you do to protect their right 
to privacy of their personal information and to protect their 
ability to work as an independent contractor free from the 
requirements--or as an employee free from the requirement to 
join a labor union?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. 
And I know that your State is one of the ones ranked the 
highest, if not the highest, to do business. And, you know, I 
think I said to you on the phone the other day when I talked to 
you, as mayor of the city of Boston, I want to put a good 
business tone out in the city.
    For 7 years as mayor, we had a AAA bond rating. For 7 years 
as mayor, we approved billions of dollars in new development in 
the city of Boston. We recruited companies to our city. As 
mayor of the city of Boston, we are on a pace to have our 
pension liability fully funded by 2024. So I felt that, as a 
mayor, I created a good business culture in the city of Boston.
    Also, as mayor, I supported the rights of organizing in the 
city of Boston, and I feel that workers deserve the right to 
choose without interference if they want to improve their 
workplace and to be able to join the union if they choose. I 
mean, that is the worker's right, just like it is their right 
to vote when I was the mayor in or out.
    So I look forward to--I will work with you on this. And I 
don't think it is an either/or. I think there is an opportunity 
for both, and I think that there is--we will have many 
conversations about this, but I do feel that people have the 
right, if they choose to join the union, they should have that 
right.
    Mr. Cline. Absolutely. I am a supporter of unions. I 
believe they have provided worker protections in many dangerous 
employment areas, and I do want labor--I do want workers to 
have that right to choose.
    I have also heard from many small businesses in my district 
that, in addition to operational complications COVID has 
caused, they are dealing with significant staffing shortages 
despite offering higher than current minimum wage employment 
opportunities. Inflated unemployment benefits create an 
unworkable environment for the businesses to attract employees, 
and there are not proper enforcement mechanisms for these 
benefits.
    Local chambers of commerce in my district are saying that 
even when businesses are able to find prospective employees, 
they frequently don't show up for interviews as requested. The 
focus needs to be on getting people off unemployment and back 
into fulfilling jobs in their communities, not continuing to 
expand unemployment benefits. What will you do to shift that 
focus? And I will have a followup if I could.
    Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. I think that the 
President's plan to vaccinate people is a big step moving 
forward. Over 200 million vaccination shots have happened in 
our country. We are not at a place where we are at herd 
immunity yet or the majority of people yet, but I think that 
that is a big step forward. I think we have to get this virus 
under control.
    I want to commend the Congress for two things: One is, when 
I was the mayor, of passing the CARES Act, that that actually 
gave $600 additional benefit to people that were unemployed 
when the pandemic began. Many people were in fear of losing 
their homes, losing their apartments, losing their ability to 
put the food on the table. Also, in the American Rescue Plan, 
the ability to get additional $300, not the $600 that was given 
in the CARES plan but $300, because people are still struggling 
out there.
    I honestly feel in my heart that the American worker would 
rather be at work than unemployed. I don't think anyone wants 
to stay on unemployment because it is eventually going to run 
out. But I do think that as we move forward here in the coming 
months, between the vaccines and getting this virus under 
control all across this country, that that is the most 
important thing.
    You know, I would love to open our economy back up and get 
people back into work. I think most people want to get back to 
work at this point, but I think we still have to take a day-at-
a-time approach here. But I am hoping that, next time, when we 
have the next budget hearing, which I think is in about a 
month, I am hoping we are in a whole different place when it 
comes to coronavirus and we are talking about different things.
    Mr. Cline. I appreciate that. You had an OIG report from 
back last October. State cited vulnerabilities in detecting 
fraud while complying with CARES Act UI program self-
certification requirement. Fifty-three percent of respondents 
cited fraud vulnerabilities within the PUA program, and the 
self-certification requirement was the top fraud vulnerability.
    And they issued another report in February of this year 
that identified $5.4 billion of potentially fraudulent UI 
benefits paid to multistate claimants, deceased individuals, 
Federal prisoners, and those with suspicious email accounts. 
And can you update us on----
    Secretary Walsh. Congressman, you froze there. Sorry. Can 
you just repeat the question? You froze. My screen froze on 
you.
    Mr. Cline. I apologize. Madam Chair, with some--with your 
indulgence----
    The Chair. Right.
    Mr. Cline [continuing]. I am just following up on an OIG 
report that identified $5 billion of potentially fraudulent UI 
benefits paid to----
    The Chair. I understand. I understand, but time has 
expired. So I will have a brief answer because we have been 
delayed, and there are other folks who are in the queue. So we 
cannot hear you.
    Secretary Walsh. Congressman, if you want to get me--if you 
can--I can't hear you, but if you can hear me, if you want to 
get us the question, I will do that. But $300 billion--all 
right. Never mind.
    Mr. Cline. I understand.
    The Chair. Congressman Cline, I am hoping that you and the 
Secretary can address this offline because we need to move on.
    Congresswoman Bustos is recognized.
    Mr. Cline. I appreciate that.
    Mrs. Bustos. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And welcome, Secretary Walsh. It is good to see you. I 
wanted to ask you about something in President Biden's American 
Jobs Plan. So he has got $40 billion that is included for a new 
dislocated worker training program. We are really, really 
excited to see that. I believe also that we need to do more to 
help dislocated workers to find good, quality jobs, including 
those who are displaced by technological advancement.
    So in my own home State of Illinois, there is a study from 
Ball State that showed between 50 and 60 percent of jobs in 
Illinois could be at risk of becoming automated, you know, 
pretty alarming. And then you have got COVID-19 that 
accelerated these trends. You have got 43 percent of businesses 
that anticipate reducing their workforce due to increased 
technological integration.
    So I introduced a bill very recently called the Investing 
in Tomorrow's Workforce Act, and what the bill would do is 
create a Department of Labor grant program to work--that would 
support industry partnerships in developing training programs 
for workers who are likely to become dislocated because of 
advances in technology. So we are pretty proud of that bill.
    So, Mr. Secretary, what I am wondering is, if you have a 
thought on the level of investment that we should put into 
dislocated worker programs in this coming fiscal year and then 
kind of the part B of that is how else we can support workers 
who are displaced by technological advancement. So if you could 
talk a little bit about that, please.
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
    I am sorry. Thank you, Congresswoman. I don't know if I got 
myself in trouble now with the chair.
    You know, one thing that--I have said this already today, 
with the pandemic has certainly put a spotlight on dislocated 
workers in industries that might not come back. You are 
absolutely right to think about some of the manufacturing and 
technology jobs that we have in America that could be 
eliminated.
    And I think what we have to do, and your bill is a good 
part of that, we have to get ahead of the curve. And the $40 
billion investment, we need to get it out in the street. And we 
need to come up--somebody asked me a question earlier. We need 
to have a good process to be able to get ahead of the 
situation, not react when a plant shuts down and not react when 
a pandemic hits.
    We need to have this ground work down there now to think 
about what are the jobs of the future and how can we have 
people that we know that potentially in the next 5, 10 years 
could be dislocated because of technology changes? How do we 
train them? So I look forward to working with Congress on this. 
I look forward to working with you on this. And I think that it 
is really important.
    And, also, the ETA, the national dislocated worker grants, 
we were able to--the Department has awarded $400 million 
already in dislocated worker grant money, so we have to get the 
money out to the systems, out to the States sooner and not have 
it sitting in a bank somewhere when it needs to be out in the 
street in these programs retraining workers.
    Mrs. Bustos. Absolutely. I am glad I have got a little bit 
of extra time. I want to shift gears a little bit. Also, very 
happy to see President Biden's commitment to green jobs. We 
have got--there is provisions in a bill that we have. It is 
called the SCALE Act, it stands for Storing CO2 and 
Lowering Emissions Act, that President Biden has included as 
part of the American Jobs Plan.
    So the bill that I introduced with a group of bipartisan 
colleagues--we always like to be able to say that, but it would 
provide funding for CO2 transport infrastructure and 
storage. And then, in addition, the bill would help create jobs 
in, you know, various places, but I am very happy that it would 
create jobs in the congressional district that I serve, 
including in rural communities. We have got a plan where we can 
transport and store CO2 at the Mount Simon Sandstone 
basin in my home State.
    So, Mr. Secretary, how could investment in clean energy 
jobs help bolster our economy, including in rural America and 
the Midwest? If you can kind of focus on that component of it 
in rural America.
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah. You know, similar questions I got 
earlier about fossil fuels, Keystone Pipeline, how do we move 
forward here. You know, there are many workers in rural America 
that have worked in different industries that aren't 
necessarily as strong as they were, and they are concerned 
about what is going to happen to these industries over the next 
5 to 10 years or maybe even before that.
    So I think that, you know, like we did with the veterans 
program, we create a program that was a competitive grant 
program prepared for eligible veterans, transitioning 
servicemembers, military spouses for careers in the clean 
energy sector. There is no reason why we can't be targeting 
areas of this country the same way and targeting with these 
types of grants to be able to make sure that a city or town 
that might have had whatever it was in the town that we know is 
going away, why we can't focus, again, and get in there the day 
before because if we wait for the day after, then we know what 
happens to the city and town if they lose an industry. People 
have to move and leave and areas become depressed.
    So I do think that we have to do--when I say ``we,'' the 
government, but I will say the DOL right now, have to do a 
better job of working with Members of Congress to target the 
areas that need the investment.
    Mrs. Bustos. Well, please see me as your partner in this, 
Mr. Secretary. We are out of time.
    I yield back. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking 
Member.
    And it is good to see you face-to-face, Secretary Walsh. 
Thank you for the conversation that we had the other day.
    I have another hearing that I have to go to, and I had a 
million questions to ask. So I am going to run through some 
stuff really quickly and then just kind of ask you, can we work 
on these things together?
    First of all, let me just say, it is good to have a 
Secretary of Labor that believes in the importance of labor and 
unions.
    Among my priorities are Federal jobs guarantee programs, 
guaranteed income, living wages and eradicating discrimination 
in the workplace. I want us to always be focused on the fact 
that the minimum wage is a minimum wage, and for those 
individuals who work in those tip-type jobs that they deserve a 
minimum wage. And if their service is good enough that their 
customer gives them a tip, all well and good because we are 
trying to build back better and stronger in our economy.
    I want to look forward to working with you. I am very much 
concerned about the fact that--first of all, let me just say 
that I am encouraged by the President's government holistic 
approach to equity and opportunities, fairness, and justice. 
And I just need to let you know that I have worked under those 
environments before, but at the end of the day, those who were 
minority communities and those who were women still got left 
out. And I want to make sure that when we build back better and 
bigger this time, that that is not the case.
    So I am very interested in how your department will hold 
entities who are responsible for pre-apprenticeship programs, 
apprenticeship programs, training programs, and jobs programs 
not only have high expectations and have the resources to do 
things, but how will they be held accountable by your 
department, whether or not it is to hold the State accountable 
or others?
    And what do you envision as potential consequences of not 
doing everything that you can to ensure that minorities and 
women are utilized in the workforce to the degree that they are 
available? Because their workforce availability is crucial when 
we determine whether or not we are measuring those standards.
    I am concerned about the elimination of discrimination. I 
am the sponsor of the CROWN Act, which makes it illegal to 
discriminate against someone because of the way they wear their 
hair, particularly the sort of ethnic expressions that are 
manifested in their hairstyles. The Department of Labor has 
the--the Secretary of Labor is the actual enforcement agent for 
that law, and I hope that you will be able to work with us on 
that.
    I am also very concerned about reentry programs, second-
chance programs, youth programs. What are you looking forward 
to in terms of giving those individuals, those formerly 
incarcerated individuals and those individuals who are most 
vulnerable to incarceration because there haven't been these 
alternatives to incarceration programs, opportunities so that 
they can become productive workers?
    I think that when we look to make sure that we are holding 
up and protecting and ensuring opportunities from training to 
working happens for those who have been most underrepresented 
in the workforce, and that is minorities, Black and Latino in 
particular, and women, Black and Latino in particular, and even 
White women, then we are really building back bigger and 
better.
    And so I really am interested in just kind of how you see 
your role in supporting the States and the programs and holding 
them accountable to do what it is the President envisioned.
    And I also want to put a pitch in for my Department of 
Labor, which is overwhelmed by so many cases that people have 
months and months before they get a response. What can we do to 
alleviate some of that backlog?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that. And 
there is a lot there, and everything you said I have worked on 
or supported in my entire time. But I just want to kind of 
quickly say that we are 21 years into the 21st century, and the 
fact that we are still talking about the issues of racism, 
discrimination, inequality, inequity for our country, as the 
United States, is somewhat a very sad story.
    And all I can say is that we have an administration in 
Washington right now, we have a President in President Biden 
and a Vice President in Vice President Harris that are not 
afraid to put these policies embedded in whether it is the 
Rescue Plan, the Jobs Plan, the Families Plan or just talk 
about on a daily basis.
    So I just want you to know, you have my commitment, and I 
know the team that works with me every day that I have met in a 
very short period of time, both the career staff and the 
political staff, we are focused and dedicated at the Department 
of Labor to tackle every single issue you brought up. And I 
could rattle off a whole bunch of things we have already done, 
but we will have other conversations, so I want to thank you 
for bringing it to the forefront today.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. I look forward to working 
with you.
    And, Mr. Secretary, the one thing I also would like to 
suggest is that we eliminate any discussion on nontraditional 
work environments for women because I think that is an 
overused, outdated term. We can do just about anything other 
than the few biological things that only men can do. Thank you 
very much.
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    The Chair. Well said, Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    Congressman Harder.
    Mr. Harder. Thank you so much, Chair DeLauro, for hosting 
today's hearing.
    And thank you, Secretary Walsh, for being here. For over a 
year, I have been very focused on some of the ongoing problems 
at the Employment Development Department in California, EDD. I 
will just come out and say it: I think EDD has been a complete 
disaster, a total and complete mess, many of those programs 
preceding the last year.
    It is supposed to be the last resort for a lot of folks 
before hunger and homelessness, yet it has totally failed to do 
its job. Fewer than 10 percent of calls to EDD in California 
actually get a human response at all. Tax forms are going to 
folks who never got a dime on unemployment, and, of course, 
criminals have stolen more than $11 billion through fraudulent 
claims.
    Just to make this personal, I sat recently with a mom of 
two kids who said she called EDD 100 times a day after they 
shut off her benefits, and she still couldn't get through to a 
live person, even after 6 weeks of calling them up to 100 times 
a day. They need the money to support her kids and yet the 
system let her down.
    Two months ago, we voted to pass the Rescue Plan, which 
gave $2 billion in funding to EDD to help fix this disaster in 
California and many other States. It was supposed to go to 
preventing fraud and ensuring families get their payments 
quickly. It is my understanding that none of that $2 billion 
has gone out the door yet.
    Secretary Walsh, I know you don't have the power to single 
handedly fix the disaster that is the California Unemployment 
Office, but when can States expect these funds we passed 2 
months ago, and what is the plan to get them out ASAP?
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah, no, we want to get the funds out the 
door as quickly as possible, and we are working right now. 
There is a proposal, setting up a grant proposal that we are 
doing, a structure, I should say, not a proposal. It is a large 
amount of money. And as I mentioned earlier, about I think a 
little less than half it have it is going to go for technical 
support and other money is going to go for other supports that 
we have to do. So we want to be very intentional about making 
sure when this money goes out, it is meant for what you voted 
for, to change the systems.
    And I know that you have concerns in your system and your 
State and other States have concerns, maybe different concerns 
in their States, but there is probably not many States in the 
country that don't have some type of concern around their whole 
system. So we are working to get that out, and I will keep you 
abreast to as soon as we get it out the door or get it proposed 
to get out the door.
    Mr. Harder. Please do. Do you have a sense of the timeline? 
I mean, how long do you think it might take until some of these 
funds are available?
    Secretary Walsh. No, I don't want to put a timeline on it 
at this point because I know there are people, as we speak 
right now, in this hearing, there are people working on it 
here. And I would want to ask them what is the better--what 
would be their hopefulness to get it out quickly.
    Mr. Harder. Great. Next question, I hate to be cynical, but 
I think we have seen organizations like EDD get more cash again 
and again, but it doesn't seem to make the situation any 
better. So my next question is, what does the oversight look 
like? How are we going to ensure these funds are actually put 
to good use instead of thrown out the window like we have seen 
happen historically with unemployment offices like California? 
And what do you think the Department of Labor's use of that 
oversight is going to look like in the future?
    Secretary Walsh. No, thank you, Congressman. You are 
absolutely right in that, and I think that, as I said earlier, 
we have had a couple periods in the 21st century that we have 
had large groups of people on unemployment, and we have had 
concerns in those unemployment.
    The pandemic has given us all an opportunity to really look 
at--put a spotlight on the system. Some of that spotlight shows 
a good part of the system where somebody gets a check in their 
home and they can put food on the table, and some of the 
spotlight is that it wasn't great, and whether it was fraud or 
not being able to get through to the office in different 
States, things like that.
    So I think it is incumbent upon all of us, the $2 billion 
investment is not a small investment. I think the American 
people, it is their money, it is their taxpayer dollars, you 
appropriate it, you voted for it, and I think that we owe the 
American people a good policy and a good process that we are 
not--that somebody 10 years from now, Secretary of Labor and a 
Congressman from your district are having conversations about, 
oh, 10 years ago, they blew it. We have an opportunity to do it 
right, and I think we need to.
    Mr. Harder. Absolutely. And I think, as you said, 
unfortunately, it often feels like Groundhog Day where every 
single economic crisis we have the same conversation about how 
broken our unemployment system is. And I guess my question for 
you is, how are we going to know if we fix it, as we emerge 
sort of out of the other end of this tunnel, as people are 
getting back to work, and the demands on our unemployment 
office are hopefully diminished?
    You know, 6 months from now, after this money has gone out, 
what are you going to be looking at from the Department of 
Labor to see whether or not we are actually on track to getting 
this right for the next economic crisis that could be down the 
road?
    Secretary Walsh. Well, I can't speak to what the 
relationship was in the past, but we are going to work closely 
with States and territories to stay connected with them to see 
what is working, what is not working. We are also going to be 
talking to Governors and mayors around the country to see what 
they are hearing.
    I mean, one thing, the way you can tell if it is fixed is 
the way people are treated on unemployment. If they need 
unemployment benefits, they apply, they get them, and when they 
don't need them anymore they don't get them. And I think it is 
really listening to people. It is listening to the public.
    I was a mayor. I wasn't the Governor. I heard every single 
day about somebody waiting to get unemployment benefits. Now, 
the concerns weren't as great as some other States in the 
country but they were concerned. They called their mayor. They 
called my office. They called their local elected officials, 
and I think that that is going to be, number one, the 
benchmark.
    But, two, we, the Department of Labor, needs to put a 
process, a check and balance in place so that we can monitor 
these systems across the country to make sure they are working 
because, again, a $2 billion investment--and then I think we 
are asking for another $100 million in this budget--that is a 
large investment to make in the UI system and get nothing back 
for it. Maybe the investments were made in the past; I am not 
sure what they were. But I can guarantee you we are going to do 
everything we can to make sure the system is--I don't want to 
say fixed--the system is a better system moving forward.
    Mr. Harder. I look forward to working with you. Thank you 
so much.
    And, with that, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Yes, Congresswoman Lawrence.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Yes, thank you so much.
    I want to say congratulations to you, Secretary Walsh. We 
have not had an opportunity to have that one-on-one, and I look 
forward to that. Being a former mayor, I wanted to bring forth 
the issue that I appreciate your understanding of the 
intersection of all of the funding that we are talking about, 
the JOBS Act, the transportation funding that we are talking 
about.
    If we do not grab hold of these funding opportunities to 
ensure that all ships rise during this, I wanted to quote James 
Clyburn who made an amazing statement to me. He said, when we 
were meeting with the President, you know the New Deal was the 
transformational moment in American history, but it left 
pockets of poverty all over this country. And we have an 
opportunity to ensure that, as we infuse the much-needed 
funding and resources to rebuild better, that we are doing it 
so all ships rise.
    So, with that, I am the chair of the Women's Caucus, co-
chair, I am the vice chair of the Black Caucus, and I am also 
the co-chair of the bipartisan skilled trade workforce caucus. 
With that being said, I am very interested, because I believe 
your money speaks louder than what you say, the budget.
    So I want to talk about the Women in Apprenticeship and 
Nontraditional Occupations, the WANTO. Now, it has been 
underfunded. It has not been funded in a way that it could be 
transformational. And so I wanted to know, what is your plan to 
fund that and to energize that account so that when we look at 
these construction sites in our cities, that it look like the 
people who work there?
    Secretary Walsh. Well, thank you very much. First and 
foremost, I appreciate the question about the funding and 
increasing the funding, but we also have to increase the access 
to these programs. You know, when I ran the building trades, I 
helped create a program called building pathways. It was a pre-
apprentice program. The trade stepped up. And it was guaranteed 
admittance into the union.
    And the second cycle of building pathways--the third cycle 
of building pathways training apprentices was a class of all 
women. It was probably the first time in this country that we 
had 12 women, I think it was 12 or 13 women in apprenticeship 
class, pre-apprentice class to get into the building trades, 
and we have to create those opportunities to get in.
    So it is not just simply--and I am not putting this down--
not simply about the money training, but how do we build up a 
network around the country? The Women's Bureau has already 
reached out to--I know in Massachusetts and in Boston, we have 
women in the trades chapter, and we need to collaborate and 
partner with those different associations around the country so 
that we get the grants around the country and we create 
opportunities and pathways into the--building trades is one 
aspect. There is other aspects as well.
    In my city, in our police class, the last class we just put 
on before I left as mayor, I want to say 32 percent of the 
people in the class are women. I want to create--we have to 
create opportunities so women have opportunities into good-
paying jobs that have been historically, traditionally labeled 
a man's job, which today, as the previous Congresswoman said, 
doesn't exist anymore. So I think that we need to do more work 
around advocacy and recruitment and advocacy.
    Mrs. Lawrence. I thank you for that. And I want you to know 
that the funding of that--and I would love to get a briefing 
with the Women's Caucus on what your plans are and how we can 
work with you on the WANTO program and also on the Skilled 
Trade Caucus, and know that you have an advocate. You have 
heard from all of us, the issue of minorities and women. We 
cannot build back better unless we build back with women. We 
cannot build back better unless our workforce is reflective of 
this amazing diversity we have in our country.
    Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. And I had a conversation 
with Congresswoman Frankel the other day, and I did say that I 
would love to present in front of the Women's Caucus as well as 
bring in the Women's Bureau in front of the Women's Caucus to 
have these conversations so that we are not just having a 
conversation and we are talking--you know, you are saying to 
me, ``We want to do this,'' and we are like, ``Yeah, we are 
going to,'' and it doesn't happen; I want to actually roll our 
sleeves up and actually get some work done.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Okay. Thank you very much. And I look 
forward to having my one-on-one with you as well.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Okay. Thank you.
    Just to follow up very briefly on what my colleague just 
talked about, Mr. Secretary, and I will be quite honest with 
you, almost every year, and that is true whether it has been a 
Republican or Democratic administration, we have had to--and I 
say ``we,'' and I have had to, as chair of this subcommittee, 
really lobby, fight hard for increased funding. In some 
respects, it may have even been eliminated both for the Women's 
Bureau and for the WANTO program.
    These are critical programs, and I am hopeful when we do 
see the President's budget, that there will be a significant 
increase in this area, particularly as we face the situation 
with, you know, close to 4 million women are out of jobs. And 
as you pointed out, as I pointed out, women are not opting out 
of the workplace. They are being pushed out of the workplace. 
So I look forward to working with you on that.
    And let me just say to my colleague, Congressman Harris, I 
am going to ask a question on behalf of Congresswoman Lucille 
Roybal-Allard, who is chairing the Homeland Security meeting, 
but I will--before we begin to wrap up and close, Congressman 
Harris, I want to give you an opportunity to be able to ask 
another question as well.
    On behalf of Congresswoman Roybal-Allard, Mr. Secretary, 
and I concur overwhelming with her, that one of the disgraceful 
things that happens in this country is that children who work 
in agriculture are not protected under the same labor laws as 
children in every other industry. There was a recent GAO report 
found that over 50 percent of all work-related child fatalities 
occur in the agriculture industry.
    Since 2001, Congresswoman Roybal-Allard has a bill, the 
CARE Act, amends the Fair Labor Standards Act, corrects the 
inequities in current law, allow children employed in 
agriculture that allow children to work longer hours at younger 
ages and more hazardous conditions than children working in 
other sectors.
    Her bill preserves the family farm exemption, sets 
standards for the ag industry, strengthens provisions on 
pesticides, et cetera. And I am going to be very honest, there 
has never been any movement in either Republican or Democratic-
run Congresses to fix the double standard in child labor 
protections.
    What are you going to be able to do to protect these 
children in the agriculture sector, Mr. Secretary? And the GAO 
child labor report from 2018 found that agriculture ranks much 
lower as a sector in the number of wage and hour investigations 
that lead to violations. Will the Department seek a new, 
comprehensive child labor enforcement strategy that better 
aligns investigations with fatal occupational injuries?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. That is 
an important issue, and as we move forward here, I will be 
happy to work with the Congresswoman on this issue and to see 
how her bill would interact with some of the work here at the 
Department of Labor.
    The Chair. Uh-huh.
    Secretary Walsh. And on your previous point, just for the 
record, I have asked for a couple of million dollars additional 
to be put into the Women's Bureau on top of what we have asked, 
so this is all from my first couple meetings with the Women's 
Bureau. We have a great Director there and a great staff there, 
great team there, I should say, and I look forward to working 
with them. So I am excited about working with them as well on 
other issues that we talked about today and in the future.
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very, very much. I think it 
is critically important right now.
    And I understand that Congressman Harris has left. Let me 
just--and I will close in a second, but I want to--and if you 
can get back to me on this, with regard to the IRAPs, the Biden 
administration has called for an end to IRAPs. They have done 
that through an executive order. But the authority for the IRAP 
model still exists.
    We need to know and I want to know the steps that you are 
going to take to rescind the authority for the IRAP rule. And 
how will you ensure that Federal funding is not used for this 
purpose?
    Secretary Walsh. Thank you. As you mentioned, the President 
did issue an executive order asking the Department to consider 
taking steps to rescind the regulations. Our review is 
currently ongoing right now. I want to reiterate the commitment 
I made during my confirmation process that we will ensure that 
every voice of the industries are heard. And to that end, the 
rulemaking that we do with regards to IRAP will be transparent 
and go through a public notice and comment period. So we are 
working through that process now.
    The Chair. Okay. And--well, yeah, and we will continue to 
pursue registered apprenticeships.
    Secretary Walsh. Yes.
    The Chair. Is that correct?
    Secretary Walsh. Yes.
    The Chair. Okay. Thank you. Also, with--and, you know, we 
didn't get much chance to talk about wage theft, but we will 
proceed with a question on that because we both know that that 
is rampant and that, you know, workers really suffer.
    I just have--again, before I close, and this is--I really 
need to get answers on this. This is about ILAB and the USMCA 
funding. This is about democracy in Mexico. We provided $180 
million to ILAB, supporting reforms for the labor justice 
system in Mexico, funds for worker capacity to train workers to 
build independent unions. Mexico, even after the passage of 
their reforms, employers are signing the protection contracts 
that don't represent workers' interest. Alarming reports on 
intimidation, harassment, incarceration of union organizers.
    And what I am asking DOL is to dedicate more of its USMCA 
resources to support Mexican workers' efforts to build 
independent and democratic unions. I don't know what your plan 
is, which I would very much like to see, of how you are going 
to monitor, enforce the capacity-building role in the USMCA, 
and address the concerns that have been raised in Mexico.
    And with regard to that as well, the funding for the 
Mexican Labor Inspectorate, it is an important role in 
protecting Mexico worker rights. It enforces the labor laws, 
supports new labor justice institutions. Since 1919, its budget 
has been cut by roughly 40 percent. It impacts operations and 
efficacy. So, again, will the administration be raising the 
concern with the appropriate Mexican budget authorities to help 
ensure that the Labor Inspectorate gets sufficient funding?
    Secretary Walsh. Yeah. The short answer to that is, 
absolutely, yes. And just ILAB, we have already awarded $80 
million for projects to support labor reforms in Mexico, 
strengthening the democratic union process, reducing workforce 
discrimination and addressing child labor, and forced labor and 
human trafficking.
    And we also--I had a conversation the other day with our 
team about making sure that the five inspectors that were 
supposed to be hired, we get them on the ground there and we 
move forward with that. So this is a fluid process, and but we 
are--but the short answer to your question, the initial 
question is, yes, we will do everything we can.
    The Chair. Well, what I would like to do is to work with 
you and with your team on this issue. I was part of the working 
group that the Speaker stood up in terms of the renegotiated 
NAFTA agreement, and someone in the past who did not support 
the TPP because of the outsourcing of jobs and other 
agreements, which have outsourced the jobs, but we had 
assurances that the Mexican reforms were going to be 
transformative, and, thus far, that is not the case.
    So I very, very much want to work closely with you in 
seeing that they are held to the standards that were laid out--
and I was in Mexico and discussing with the President these 
issues, the President of Mexico--and that what we need to do is 
to make sure that workers--and I know where your heart is on 
where workers--you know, workers' rights, that those rights are 
adhered to and that the Mexican labor has the opportunity to be 
able to have independent unions where they can bargain for 
wages and safe workplaces. So it is a critically important 
area, Mr. Secretary, so look forward to that conversation, 
okay.
    Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. We have a really strong 
team in ILAB as well, so I will make sure that they stay 
connected to your office as we move forward here. Actually, as 
a matter of fact, while I have a moment, we have a strong team 
at DOL completely, and I want to thank them for the incredible 
work they have done, the career people in particular for all 
the great work they have done over the last 4 years here 
keeping the ship moving forward, and also the political people 
that are coming in, the dedication.
    So I am fortunate and blessed to have such great people 
work with me every single day, many whom I haven't met yet 
because of coronavirus, but the work still continues. So I just 
want to give a shout-out to the team at DOL for the great work 
they do.
    The Chair. Thank you. And in the past, DOL has not had 
anywhere near the resources that it needs. We have tried to 
address that in the Labor-H Committee over the years, and now 
so it is critically important to see what the Biden 
administration has done here and so pleased with the budget for 
Labor. This is strong funding increases for worker protection, 
job training, apprenticeships, we talked about, community 
colleges, and so many other areas.
    I view what you are doing as central to addressing the 
issues that workers in this country have faced, particularly--
they have in the past but particularly as a result of the 
pandemic, and they need your strength and the strength of your 
team to get help to them to get back on track.
    Let me reiterate my strong support for OSHA, and we move 
forward with the emergency temporary standard to protect 
workers. You know, I think that we are moving to a government 
that invests in workers and puts workers and their families 
ahead of corporate profits in this country, so it is so good to 
see a tilt in that direction. This is from my personal 
perspective.
    And it is all about what your immigrant parents and what my 
immigrant parents strove for, and that was their children to be 
able to get a shot at the American Dream. We are both in 
positions where we can help to make that happen, and I know 
your commitment in this effort. And the other piece of this is 
poverty is unacceptable, and we have the capacity to abolish 
it. And Robert Kennedy said that in a land of plenty, poverty 
is evil. The United States is a land of plenty.
    So, again, look forward to working with you as we try to 
turn some of these things around. Thank you so much and your 
patience with regard to our delay and so forth. I thank you for 
your testimony today. And, with that, this hearing is 
adjourned. Thank you.
    [Questions and answers submitted for the record follow:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

                                            Wednesday, May 5, 2021.

                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

                                WITNESS

HON. MIGUEL CARDONA, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
    The Chair. The hearing will come to order.
    As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few 
housekeeping matters.
    For today's meeting, the chair or staff designated by the 
chair may mute participants' microphones when they are not 
under recognition for the purposes of eliminating inadvertent 
background noise.
    Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves. 
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask you 
if you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate 
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
    I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock 
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to 
the next member until the issue is resolved and you will retain 
the balance of your time.
    You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how 
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will 
turn to yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the 
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When 
your time has expired, the clock will turn red and I will begin 
to recognize the next member.
    In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the 
chair and ranking member, then members present at the time the 
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of 
seniority, and finally members not present at the time the 
hearing is called to order.
    Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have 
set up an email address to which members can send anything they 
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups. 
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
    With that, I want to acknowledge Ranking Member Cole and 
all of our colleagues.
    I am excited this morning to welcome Secretary Cardona who 
joins the Biden administration from my home State of 
Connecticut.
    It is a pleasure to have you with us today and to have your 
voice in this discussion. As the son of Puerto Rican parents 
who grew up in the projects and entered school as an English 
learner and now as Secretary of the Department of Education, 
you bring an important wealth of knowledge and personal 
experience to our discussion.
    I know many in Connecticut are grateful for your service 
working for two decades in our Meriden Connecticut Public 
Schools and then as State commissioner of education. We are 
proud of the example you set for students not only in 
Connecticut, but across this country.
    This week we celebrate Teacher Appreciation Week, a time to 
give back and show our gratitude to the countless hardworking 
teachers who dedicate their lives to educating our Nation's 
students. This is why we must continue to support teacher 
training and preparation programs, including additional 
resources for Title II.
    But in recognizing our educators this week, I also want to 
recognize you, Secretary Cardona. Thank you for the sacrifices 
you have made to help students of all ages, races, sexes, and 
backgrounds to reach for the American Dream. You know firsthand 
how education can serve as a great equalizer that opens doors 
and opportunities to jobs, higher wages, and a better life.
    But, as you will expand further in your testimony, it can 
only serve as this great equalizer if, and only if, it is 
affordable, accessible, and achievable for all. I am so 
grateful to see that the Biden administration has made it a top 
priority to reverse years of underinvestment in our Federal 
education system.
    Sadly, our schools, our teachers, our students have been 
struggling for far too long. As the richest country in the 
world, it is unconscionable that we still have teachers forced 
to take money out of their own pockets to buy paper, pencil, 
even food for their students, and students who struggle in 
school because they are hungry or homeless or are not having 
their unique needs met.
    And it is unacceptable that schools and school systems that 
predominantly serve students of color are often considerably 
more underfunded than schools that serve White populations.
    That is why I am grateful that President Biden took 
decisive action to respond to the economic crisis by proposing 
the American Rescue Plan, a plan which includes $170 billion to 
help K through 12 schools, colleges, and universities safely 
reopen and to accelerate learning for students impacted by the 
pandemic.
    Further, the administration initiated a bold plan to invest 
in American jobs, which includes $100 billion to rebuild K 
through 12 schools across the country, an additional $12 
billion investment in community college infrastructure, the 
cornerstone of education and training, especially for 
nontraditional and disadvantaged students.
    And, more recently, the President released the American 
Families Plan, which includes groundbreaking proposals for 
universal pre-K, free community college, and a major increase 
to the Pell Grant program to make college more affordable for 
disadvantaged students.
    The investments for universal pre-K would improve the lives 
of millions of children. Studies show that children attending 
universal pre-K programs do better academically in later 
grades. And so I believe investing in pre-K plays a critical 
role in ensuring our students are equipped with the tools they 
need to succeed early on.
    Let me though stress that these investments in pre-K must 
go hand in hand with investments in childcare. We cannot afford 
to think of childcare and pre-K as separate systems. We must 
make sure that our investments in childcare and pre-K keep 
working families in mind. Breaking pre-K out from the overall 
childcare umbrella could leave behind families who work beyond 
school hours, those with infants and toddlers, or those with 
students with disabilities.
    So I want to stress the importance of ensuring that we are 
also providing both education and childcare services to working 
families.
    I am grateful to see that the administration budget is once 
again taking the lead by submitting the 2022 budget request for 
education that lays out a plan for how to improve the lives of 
millions of American students and families.
    Mr. Secretary, your budget request for ED programs under 
the Labor, HHS, Education Subcommittee is $102.8 billion, an 
increase of $29.3 billion over the current levels. These 
increased investments are unprecedented. They are sure to go a 
long way to reverse years of underinvestment in our Federal 
education system.
    It is not enough to just throw money at a problem. We need 
to work to ensure that the dollars go to those who need them 
the most, particularly those schools and students who come from 
underserved communities.
    No student in any State should have to accept a lower-
quality education simply because of where they live or the 
color of their skin, which is why I am encouraged to see that 
the administration is working diligently to reverse such 
funding inequities for students of color by more than doubling 
the funding for Title I grants.
    Last year, House Democrats included the maintenance of 
equity provisions in the President's American Rescue Plan to 
protect low-income school districts from disproportionate cuts 
by States like we saw during the Great Recession.
    States need to step up and do a better job of equitably 
funding their highest-need districts, and I look forward to 
reviewing more details on this proposal in the President's full 
budget release.
    I am also pleased that the administration is helping to 
increase the availability of wraparound services to underserved 
students, providing $443 million, an increase of $413 million 
for full-service community schools.
    Since becoming chair of the subcommittee, we have increased 
funding for community schools by more than 70 percent. We 
included the program in our initiative on funding for social 
and emotional learning and whole-child approaches to learning.
    It is a bold investment, and we are hoping that it builds 
on the strong foundation established by this subcommittee.
    If I can just for a second, I would like to quote Dr. Pam 
Cantor from Turnaround for Children, who worked with us on this 
initiative, and something she often says in relation to the 
whole-child approach to learning. And this is the quote.
    ``Adversity doesn't just happen to children. It happens 
inside their brains and bodies through the biologic mechanism 
of stress. This is why students in poverty are well served by 
schools that provide holistic services and support that account 
for their social, emotional, physical, and academic needs.''
    And I think that that really is appropriate.
    I would be remiss if I did not say thank you for the 
critical funding increase that you are making for IDEA Part B, 
grants to States and for programs serving Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities, minority-serving institutions, 
Tribal colleges, community colleges, and underresourced 
institutions of higher education.
    I applaud the investment you are making to postsecondary 
education in making it more affordable for students with low 
incomes. In combination with the American Families Act, this 
administration would provide an increase of more than $1,800 to 
the maximum Pell Grant, the largest increase to Pell ever.
    Also, it would include $250 million for the increase to 
IDEA Part C, which supports infants and toddlers with 
disabilities with early interventions and therapies that lay 
the groundwork for later learning. And the President's request 
also proposes $144 million for the Office of Civil Rights.
    Thank you for putting an increased focus--and I know it is 
an interest of all of the members of our subcommittee--that you 
are putting our students' mental health in this request. It is 
an important issue and one that became particularly clear in 
our hearing in March on how COVID-19 has exposed and 
exacerbated the mental health and substance abuse crises we 
have in our country today.
    The investments are crucial. We are finally moving toward a 
budget and a role for government that works to level the 
playing field so that anyone, no matter where they are, where 
they are from, can achieve the American Dream.
    With that, let me thank you again, Secretary Cardona, for 
joining us. I look forward to working with you.
    And with that, let me recognize Ranking Member Cole for any 
opening remarks.
    Can I ask people to be on mute, anyone who is not speaking 
to mute? Thank you.
    Ranking Member Cole.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    Before I begin my formal remarks, I have to say, I always 
come to these meetings and know they are going to be 
interesting. But I also come because I want to see the visual 
background you are going to treat me to every time. I mean, I 
feel like I live in dull places and work in dull offices every 
time I see this. But it looks terrific. Always does.
    Good morning, Mr. Secretary. I want to welcome you to your 
first hearing before our subcommittee, and I genuinely look 
forward to your testimony today.
    First, I would like to start out by once again expressing 
concern regarding the total level of spending proposed by the 
administration. The fiscal year 2022 budget request will be 
this administration's fourth proposed trillion dollar-plus 
package, fourth in barely 100 days in office. The level of 
proposed spending is simply unnecessary, irresponsible, and 
unacceptable.
    I have been a long-time supporter of helping achieve better 
outcomes for our students, but a proposed 41 percent increase 
for the Department of Education in a single year will leave the 
next generation saddled with the highest national debt our 
Nation has ever seen.
    Average debt held by the national government per taxpayer 
is five times higher than average student loan debt. I believe 
we can do better than that for these students and for our 
future.
    As a member of this subcommittee, I understand the 
important role played by domestic programs, and I certainly 
support increases for these critical programs.
    I was pleased to see support for special education. We know 
the Federal Government has not upheld its fair share of 
responsibility for ensuring that education is provided for 
students with disabilities. I hope we can see achieving support 
for sustained increases for special education as a bipartisan 
goal, so I applaud your efforts in this area.
    I also believe in strong support for Pell Grant recipients. 
Pell Grants help first-generation college students chart a 
course to a better future into the middle class.
    I would like to see strong support for civics education, 
although there are some areas that I have concerns about there 
that I will be raising during my questions.
    I also believe we should do more to help underserved 
populations and underperforming schools. But an annual increase 
that more than doubles the existing program does not strike me 
as a responsible or sustainable way to help these students.
    I also want to stress the importance of working towards a 
bipartisan agreement on overall spending levels for defense and 
nondefense discretionary spending. I have made clear the 
approach taken in the President's proposal for the Department 
of Defense is not acceptable for our Nation's security and our 
military readiness. And while we have substantial increases in 
domestic programs, essentially flat funding defense is not an 
acceptable portion of the budget. We are going to have to come 
to some larger agreement there.
    I also hope we can restore the authority of the 
Appropriations Committee. The recent decision by the majority 
to pursue a partisan path of mandatory funding to pay for an 
extraordinary expansion of government should not be the new 
normal.
    These recent proposals outside the customary budget process 
represent the greatest increases in taxes and government 
spending in modern history. To achieve them could trigger class 
conflict on an unprecedented scale.
    The President seems to believe he can convince the American 
people that they can have unlimited government services at 
someone else's expense.
    Fortunately, Americans are smarter than that and know there 
is no such thing as a free lunch. I view this budget that you 
are proposing in the context of that larger disagreement.
    I hope there is a return to a path of discretionary 
appropriations where these investments belong and where both 
sides of the aisle can bring ideas to the table.
    I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary, for coming before us 
today. I look forward to a future where we can meet once again 
in person. I genuinely look forward to getting to know you 
because my good friend, the chairman, has spoken so highly of 
you on so many occasions, and I know you will make an 
outstanding appointee.
    So while we will have areas that we differ, I genuinely 
look forward to working with you and getting to know you and 
welcome you before the subcommittee.
    With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Mr. Secretary, your full written testimony will be entered 
into the record, and you are now recognized for 5 minutes for 
your opening statement.
    Secretary Cardona. Well, thank you and good morning, 
Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking Member Cole, and distinguished 
members of the committee. It is really a pleasure to meet you, 
and I do look forward to meeting you in person in the near 
future. And I am honored and humbled to serve as Secretary of 
Education.
    I am pleased to join you today and proud to testify on 
behalf of President Biden's fiscal year 2022 budget request for 
the Department of Education.
    I am especially honored to be testifying during Teacher 
Appreciation Week, and I would like to recognize all the 
hardworking teachers, faculty, and staff for their tireless 
dedication to students, in particular this year, which was so 
challenging. I want to thank all the educators, all the 
teachers for what they have done. I look at this request as a 
way to honor the hard work of our educators.
    The budget request makes good on President Biden's campaign 
commitment to invest in education and begins to address the 
significant inequities that students, primarily students of 
color, confront every day in schools and in pursuit of higher 
education and career technical education.
    I first want to thank members of the subcommittee and your 
staff who helped ensure passage of the American Rescue Plan, 
bringing vital resources to our schools and colleges across the 
country. I can tell you from experience that the ARP funds will 
ensure that school buildings reopen for full-time, in-person 
instruction as safely and as soon as possible.
    Once we fully reopen buildings, we still have plenty of 
work to do. Generations of inequity have left far too many 
students without equitable access to high-quality, inclusive 
learning opportunities, including in our rural communities.
    Education can be the great equalizer--it was for me--if we 
prioritize, replicate, and invest in what works for all 
students, not just some.
    We must do more to level the playing field, including 
providing a strong foundation from birth, improving diversity 
among the teacher workforce, and creating learning pathways 
that work for all students.
    To that end, the budget proposal calls on Congress to 
invest nearly $103 billion in the Department of Education 
programs, a 41 percent increase over the fiscal year 2021 
appropriation, to support student success.
    The fiscal year 2022 request also makes a meaningful down 
payment toward the Biden-Harris administration's goal of 
reversing inequities. It starts with a proposed increase to 
double funding for Title I to address disparities between 
underresourced schools and their wealthier counterparts, 
support teachers in Title I schools earning competitive wages, 
expand access to pre-kindergarten, and provide equitable access 
to advanced coursework.
    Our request would also build on Congress' prior commitments 
to support the mental health needs of our students, including 
by increasing the number of school counselors, school nurses, 
and mental health professionals in our schools.
    In addition, the President's request will increase the 
availability of wraparound services to students and families in 
underserved schools and communities with a significant 
expansion of the Full Service Community Schools program.
    We also think it is past time for the Federal Government to 
make good on its commitment to students with disabilities and 
their families, and the request makes a significant move toward 
full funding of IDEA, proposing a 20 percent increase for IDEA 
State grants.
    Turning to higher education, our budget proposal begins the 
Biden-Harris administration's critical work to increase access 
and affordability for postsecondary education.
    The budget's proposal, coupled with increases proposed in 
the American Families Plan, would be the largest increase to 
the Pell Grant ever, helping millions of students and families 
pursue their goals.
    Importantly, our proposal would also ensure that Dreamers 
may receive full Pell Grants if they meet the current 
eligibility requirements.
    The fiscal year 2022 request paints a bold picture for the 
future of our institutional and student support programs. The 
budget increases institutional capacity and student support for 
minority-serving institutions with additional funding for 
HBCUs, Hispanic-serving institutions, Asian American, Native 
American, and Pacific Islander-serving institutions, Tribally 
controlled colleges and universities, as well as those TRIO and 
GEAR UP programs that we know help ensure underserved students 
succeed in and graduate from college.
    Finally, we prioritize efforts to enforce civil rights laws 
related to education through a 10 percent increase for the 
Office of Civil Rights to protect students and advance equity 
in educational opportunity and delivery in preschool through 
college.
    Working together with stakeholders, including educators and 
students, we can and will heal, learn, and grow together 
through this challenging time.
    I am committed to working collaboratively with each of you 
to strengthen local decisionmaking and help improve 
opportunities, pathways, and outcomes for students across this 
country, including in our rural communities.
    So I want to thank you. And I look forward to any questions 
you may have.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    The Chair. I am pleased in your testimony to hear about $20 
billion for Title I and addressing the funding disparities 
between underresourced schools, districts, and their wealthier 
counterparts.
    What is of concern to me is that 90 percent of K through 12 
education funding in this country comes from States and 
districts. With just a handful of exceptions, I am concerned 
that most States do not sufficiently prioritize funding for 
high-poverty districts and communities of color.
    Given the reality, how do you see the proposed $20 billion 
increase to Title I improve the equity in State funding?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    Well, we know the elements of this plan really serve to 
communicate the transformational impact that President Biden 
and the team want to have in education and really value the 
role that education plays in the growth of this country.
    So the Title I allotment really helps level the playing 
field by making sure that our schools, especially our students 
in greatest need, have additional resources to provide more 
reading instruction, more social and emotional support for 
these students, providing them the intervention and support 
that they are going to need so that it could--education could 
be that equalizer for them.
    This targeted approach towards Title I schools and programs 
really aims to make sure that when we are out of this pandemic 
and when we are thinking about education in the years to come, 
we are making sure that all students have access to high-
quality opportunities, high-quality instruction, additional 
support to be successful in school.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    And one of the things that we did in protecting high-
poverty districts from disproportionate State cuts, we included 
critical maintenance of equity provisions. And what I will do 
is, for the record, I think, send a question to you with regard 
to that issue of maintenance of effort.
    If I can, let me move to the student loan servicing crisis.
    In 2017, the Trump administration Office of Federal Student 
Aid announced Next Gen. This was a promise to improve student 
loan servicing for borrowers and to increase cost savings for 
taxpayers.
    $277 million later in increases since 2017, three operating 
offices at FSA, the Trump administration and FSA failed to 
deliver on the promise. At the last moment, they attempted to 
create a new system, the Interim Servicing Solution, ISS, to 
correct the failure.
    In a bipartisan rebuke of this effort, Congress instituted 
a 90-day pause on any award under the ISS solicitation. That 
pause expired in March of this year.
    My question is, where do things stand with regard to the 
Next Gen initiative? Will you be moving forward with awards 
under the ISS solicitation?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    And just to go back, I do look forward to a question on the 
record, but it is critically important that the maintenance of 
effort, maintenance of equity is a part of this. So we cannot 
be using funds to supplant. Our States need more not less. They 
need more now. So we want to make sure that we are working with 
our States to ensure that they are doing their part as we do 
ours.
    And with regard to your question now, the Next Generation, 
we do look forward to working on this. It has paused. We 
haven't made decisions yet about how we are moving forward, but 
I can assure you that I agree wholeheartedly that we need to do 
more as an agency.
    I am thrilled that we brought on Richard Cordray who is 
really known to be a consumer protection guru. We need that 
level of advocacy and support for our students who are 
borrowing to go to college, and we need to keep the students at 
the center of the conversation.
    So all these conversations are something that I am really 
keenly aware is going to be critical to make sure that we are 
protecting our students not our loan agencies. And I can assure 
you that I want to work with you and others to make sure that 
we are addressing those issues in a timely way.
    The Chair. Okay. And I might add that Congress has provided 
about $800 million for the Temporary Expanded Public Service 
Loan Forgiveness program. That was intended to address the 
failures of the Department and student loan servicers in 
administering the program. As of November 2020, the Department 
has only discharged $95 million in loans.
    What is the Department going to do to ensure the funding is 
used as intended?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for the question.
    And similarly, I think we need to do better with public 
service loan forgiveness. About 98 percent have been rejected 
of the claims that are put in.
    To me, this really needs a very critical look to make sure 
that the intention that you had in Congress is followed through 
on and that we are doing everything to put our students at the 
center of the conversation, make sure we are serving students.
    So, again, a lot of attention is going to be placed on this 
moving forward. We are bringing folks on board that have that 
mentality to make sure that we keep the students at the center 
of the conversation. We serve students. We have to make that 
very clear in our policies.
    The Chair. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. 
Secretary.
    Let me now yield to Congressman Cole.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
    And, again, welcome, Mr. Secretary. It is good to have you 
here. I have some big questions I want to ask you, but I have 
got something that is important to me personally. It is smaller 
and more targeted. And I want to give you an opportunity to 
respond.
    I know that you and I, and certainly the chairwoman, agree 
that our Nation's students need more and better civics 
education. I am deeply concerned by a Federal Register notice 
published last month by your Department proposing competitive 
priorities for the national programs in civics.
    That proposal actually triggered just a blizzard, at least 
in my office, of bipartisan--I want to stress bipartisan--
critical response. It is effectively, in my view, jeopardizing 
civics as a bipartisan priority and potentially jeopardizing a 
piece of legislation the chairwoman and I have worked on 
together for a long time.
    Specifically, the Federal Register notice references The 
1619 Project and the work of a controversial scholar. These 
references have politicized civic education, whether 
intentionally or unintentionally, and created an impression 
that the administration cannot be trusted to promote civic 
education in a bipartisan, unideological way. Civics education, 
in my view, ought to heal what divides our country, and this 
proposal, in my view, exacerbates that.
    In light of those concerns, would you, number one, explain 
the reference if you are familiar with it, which I expect you 
are, and then would you consider withdrawing the proposal 
pending further consideration?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for the question.
    I came from the local district level. I was fortunate to 
serve as commissioner of education in Connecticut. And 
curriculum decisions are made there with local control, with 
input of local stakeholders and the community there, and that 
is where it should stay.
    The Education Department does not mandate curriculum nor 
does it lean in one way or another. What it does do is provide 
parameters for grants to be submitted, clarity so that those 
who are submitting grants can submit.
    Did you want to speak, Chairwoman DeLauro?
    Mr. Cole. Yeah. Well, I appreciate that----
    Secretary Cardona. No, I think Chairwoman DeLauro is going 
to ask someone to mute.
    The Chair. Yes. If I can, please, we are trying to--whoever 
is unmuted, please mute so that we can hear the testimony and 
the questions.
    Secretary Cardona. So, Congressman Cole, I am going to be 
quick because I see your time is ticking.
    But I do feel this. I have been an educator for over 20, 
22, 23 years. It is critically important that our educators 
have voice in developing curriculum because we know that 
curriculum should serve as a window and a mirror and a sliding 
door into their own experiences and other experiences, as Dr. 
Rudine Sims Bishop has taught us, in education.
    So curriculum does a lot more. What it does is engage 
students. And students should always see themselves in 
curriculum as well.
    So I welcome seeing States come up with creative ideas on 
how to have students be seen in their curriculum but do so in a 
manner that builds community.
    Educators can do that. We can build community under one 
flag by doing this. And I have complete confidence in the 
educators across the country that they can get it done.
    Mr. Cole. Us too. I used to be one and my son is a public 
school teacher. And I appreciate your remarks, by the way, 
honoring our teachers.
    But I am worried [inaudible]. And I agree with your 
statement we should not be dictating curriculum at the Federal 
level. That is not our role, it is not our responsibility.
    But when I see grant standards laid out in The 1619 
Project--which we can discuss at length, but it is very 
controversial--and I see a scholar, a respected scholar, I am 
sure, but, again, controversial scholar, and those are sort of 
laid out, the impression left is, okay, we want a particular 
version, a particular kind of civics taught, and we are 
dictating it here.
    And, again, I have had people contacting me. I think you 
had 37 Senators write you about this across the political 
aisle. It is not just Republicans. We actually have Democrats 
that are interested in civics education also raise this issue.
    So I don't have a lot of time left. I certainly want to 
give you a chance to respond, and I certainly would welcome a 
further dialogue about this.
    I really want to flag this, because I can tell you, the 
political opposition to what I consider a bipartisan bill and 
something we ought to be working on together is growing and it 
is growing across the political spectrum, and that registry 
notice had a lot to do with sparking this off.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you. Thank you, Ranking Member 
Cole. I appreciate your perspective, and I can assure you that 
I do want to work with you and others to listen to the 
different perspectives.
    And let me just underscore, our educational system, yes, we 
have a divided country, but our education system can unite us. 
Again, the goal here is to really build community, have 
students engage in their learning, and grow together.
    But thank you for your comments.
    Mr. Cole. I agree with you, and I will just end with this, 
but that registry notice did not unite us. It is doing quite 
the opposite.
    So I would just ask you to review that, and I would look 
forward to a further dialogue with you about it, because I 
don't want to lose a good piece of legislation and I think we 
are going to over this issue.
    With that, Madam Chair, thank you. You have been very 
indulgent. I yield back.
    I look forward to talking to you about other things, Mr. 
Secretary.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, sir. Thank you.
    The Chair. Congressman Pocan.
    Mr. Pocan. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And thank you, Mr. Secretary. It is a pleasure to meet you 
virtually. I also serve on the Ed and Labor Committee in 
addition to this subcommittee, so I have got the feeling we 
will be working together a lot.
    I would like to try to get to three subjects, so I am going 
to ask the questions right away, and if you can give answers so 
I can get to three subjects in 5 minutes, I would appreciate 
it.
    We know that our public schools have been underfunded, 
especially Title I, in IDEA programs, and that has hurt many 
kids' educational opportunities. Very glad to see the 
significant investment in the fiscal year 2022 budget.
    But while we don't have our full budget, I want to discuss 
my concerns about the lack of oversight on the hundreds of 
millions of dollars distributed by the Department through the 
Charter Schools Program.
    Between 2006 to 2014, of the 4,829 schools that got charter 
school grants, 37 percent of those schools never opened, 11 
percent opened and then closed. And it is a large percent of 
schools--I might be giving the wrong percent on the second one, 
I am sorry--but we had a large percent of schools that have had 
this happen. The amount of funding estimated to have been given 
to those schools is close to $500 million.
    The IG looked at this, and they said that the Department 
did not include charter school closure in risk assessments when 
they were basing oversight and monitoring decisions, and the 
closure process lacked oversight, and the risk of significant 
fraud, waste, and abuse of Federal program funds is high.
    I would just like to talk to you about if you are willing 
to commit to review that previous inspector general reports and 
implement their recommendations.
    Secretary Cardona. I am interested in making sure that we 
are holding folks accountable for the funds that they get and 
ensuring that all students get a good education, including in 
charter schools, that the money is being used for what it is 
intended, and that our students are getting a good return on 
investment.
    And speaking of support and oversight, I want to just 
quickly acknowledge two folks that are in the room with me, 
Larry Keane (ph) and Donna Harris-Aikens, for their support and 
preparation for the materials today. They don't want to leave 
that out.
    Mr. Pocan. So you will be looking at those reports and you 
will be implementing the recommendations?
    Secretary Cardona. I will be reviewing the reports, and I 
would be happy to discuss further with you further steps. But I 
will be reviewing the reports. Thank you.
    Mr. Pocan. Great.
    Also on student debt, I introduced a bill back in 2013, a 
number of people have done it since then, to try to allow the 
refinancing student loans. We know the burgeoning debt is huge, 
$1.57 trillion. Right now some people are still paying like 6 
percent or a mixture of different loans. It is not easy to 
consolidate and get rid of those rates. Rates are historically 
low.
    Is there any way that you would look at and support the 
effort to be able to refinance your student loans at a lower 
rate, perhaps the lower--whatever the current rate is, so that 
we could help relieve some of that additional burden?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Congressman.
    We really have to have a very broad look at how we are 
servicing students and how our policies are creating obstacles 
for students.
    I am really eager to make sure that once Rich Cordray gets 
on board and we have our under secretary, that we really 
revisit all strategies, including those to make sure we are 
giving the students the best opportunity to be successful and 
go through college without having a huge debt burden when they 
graduate.
    So nothing is off the table. Yes, I am interested in 
looking at ways to provide easier opportunities for them to 
make college affordable.
    Mr. Pocan. I appreciate that. And I think this is really 
one of the easiest lifts out there. It is bipartisan 
legislation that is out there. But, as you know, bills don't 
pass Congress these days too often, so anything the Department 
could do in this area would certainly be appreciated.
    I have had a request from some universities in my district: 
When will the Department issue guidelines on spending the 
institutional portion of the American Rescue Plan bill? They 
are just trying to get some idea of when you might provide some 
of that.
    Secretary Cardona. They have been very appreciative, and I 
respect the need for them to have this information. As you 
know, there are different vetting processes and comment 
portions that we have to go through. But I am pleased to share 
that, I think within the next 2 weeks they are going to be 
getting information on that.
    Mr. Pocan. That is awesome, Mr. Secretary. Thank you. And 
since you have been very brief, I can get to one more question.
    Secretary Cardona. Sure.
    Mr. Pocan. There is an issue, back on charter school 
programs, I have been in the legislature for 14 years before I 
came to Congress, on my fifth term. I have seen some of the 
worst in these programs. I think a lot of public dollars get 
wasted.
    There was a program, the charter management organization, 
an IDEA charter school that received $100 million in awards. 
The school was ruled ineligible by the Department staff, and 
yet the Secretary at the time apparently appealed that and let 
another million-dollar grant go out in 2020 and a total of $72 
million over 5 years for the replication and expansion of high-
quality charter schools.
    Would you commit that the charter schools that are 
determined to be ineligible by the Department for a grant cycle 
don't receive funds?
    Secretary Cardona. I am going to look into that further. 
But, yes, I think if they are not eligible, I think I would be 
hard pressed to understand why we are funding.
    Mr. Pocan. Great. I appreciate it. Thank you.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
    And welcome, Mr. Secretary. As someone who has been on a 
faculty for 30 years in the past, I appreciate your experience 
in education as well.
    Let me bring up a couple of issues. First, just to 
reiterate what Ranking Member Cole said, I am also concerned 
about The 1619 Project working its way into some kind of 
Federal curricula. I urge you to look.
    There is a Wall Street Journal piece written last year by 
Ms. Latasha Fields, a Black American from Chicago, and the 
article is entitled, ``God, Parents, and the `1619 Project.' ''
    I just urge you to consider that and read that before you 
consider in any way adopting The 1619 Project into any Federal 
curricula.
    Now, I also want to follow up on some of the questioning 
from your confirmation hearing over in the Senate. Mr. Scott, 
Senator Tim Scott, who I think represents the feelings of many 
people who feel that the education system is failing them, 
asked you about the OSP program, the Opportunity Scholarship 
voucher program in Washington, D.C.
    You were noncommittal at the time, in the beginning of 
February. I would like to know if you have looked into it more 
and if now you, in fact, support the idea of the opportunity 
scholarships in Washington, D.C.?
    Secretary Cardona. Yes, thank you.
    So we are looking into that. I am getting more information. 
I want to make sure that there is a need, there is an interest 
in order to support it. I certainly want to protect the 
learning opportunities of those students that already are in 
it. Obviously, we will make sure we allow those students not to 
have additional disruptions in their program.
    But, yes, we are still looking at what the need is and what 
the demand is to then make decisions about how to fund it.
    Mr. Harris. Well, Mr. Secretary, this is a subject I have 
been interested in for years. There is a waiting list for 
those. There are lotteries for those. How do you question the 
need or demand? I mean, your people at the Department of 
Education haven't told you that, in fact, there is always more 
need and demand than, in fact, available funding?
    Secretary Cardona. Well, again, meeting with my staff, I 
will find out more information, more specifics. But there has 
also been some question about the funding that goes to it and 
whether the demand is there for that funding.
    Mr. Harris. Well, we will follow up with you because my 
time is short.
    Of great concern to me is the revelation in the last few 
days that the CDC was in communication with teachers unions to 
develop the medical guidelines for school reopening.
    Now, teachers unions have a lot of teachers in them. I 
don't think they have a lot of doctors in them. And I think 
that decision should be made on scientific medical basis.
    But of interest is that Ms. Psaki, in a press conference 
the other day, said that the administration is going to 
involve, of course, the CDC, but they will involve the 
Department of Education in coming up with the CDC guidelines.
    So I want to know very briefly, are you in contact with the 
teachers unions and in contact with the CDC and somehow 
communicating teachers unions' demands to CDC using the 
Education Department?
    Secretary Cardona. Absolutely not. I do feel that my 
success in Connecticut with reopening schools was through a 
good, thorough partnership with our educators, our leaders. And 
then having conversations about how to safely reopen schools 
does involve a very strong connection with CDC and our health 
partners, but it also includes looking at what the needs are in 
the building, because ventilation and things like that that are 
woefully underresourced have to be taken into account.
    Mr. Harris. Sure. I understand that. But just to get it 
straight, so you have not had email communication or other 
communications with the teachers unions about the CDC reopening 
requirements going into the future?
    Secretary Cardona. Correct.
    Mr. Harris. Okay. Thank you.
    So with regard to reopening schools, I think, medically, I 
think there is pretty clear indication that that is something 
that should proceed, probably should have proceeded a while 
ago, and I appreciate that you did just that in Connecticut.
    Now, finally, I want to close following up on what Senator 
Rand Paul and Senator Romney asked you about, which is a topic 
of great interest to me, has a daughter who is an NCAA All-
American athlete.
    The testimony you gave in the Senate indicated that you 
actually support biological boys competing with girls in school 
sports. So I just want to get on the record, this is the House 
side, that was the Senate side, is that true?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Dr. Harris, and 
congratulations to your daughter.
    I am going to be very clear. And thank you for----
    Mr. Harris. I want to thank you for that, because there is 
no way she could compete against biologic males. She would 
never have gained All-American status. But I await your answer.
    Secretary Cardona. Yeah. And there is no way that I 
wouldn't support all students in our country to have 
opportunities to engage in school activities, which include 
extracurricular.
    So as I said then and I will say it again, trans students--
    Mr. Harris. [inaudible] Biological boys should be competing 
with biological girls? That is a very specific question. I 
understand, we can create transgender leagues. I don't mind.
    Should biological boys be competing with biological girls?
    Secretary Cardona. As I said then, I will say again, 
transgender students deserve every opportunity to participate 
in all school activities.
    Mr. Harris. And I will take that as including to compete 
against biological girls. I am disappointed.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Clark.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, Chairwoman DeLauro.
    Welcome, Secretary. We are thrilled to have you. And I just 
want to start by thanking you for your last answer and for 
standing up for equality for every single one of our kids.
    I want to specifically ask you to start off about the 
serious shortage of mental health professionals. I am so 
pleased to see a billion-dollar request to increase the number 
of those professionals in school settings.
    But I am interested in if you have thought about strategies 
as Secretary of Education for increasing and addressing the 
shortage of mental health professionals overall as we are 
looking to increase them in our schools.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Congresswoman Clark.
    So I will start by saying when I visited this last month, 
month and a half, I visited about nine States, ten different 
schools, and one thing that came out loud and clear is the need 
for our schools to look different than they were prior to March 
2020. And one of those differences is the need for better 
social, emotional supports, better mental health supports. Our 
students are in greater need there.
    So your question is a very good one. How do we create the 
capacity there? How do we look to connect our K-12 institutions 
with our institutions of higher education to make sure that we 
are preparing enough professionals to fill the demand that we 
have in our schools to meet the social and emotional needs of 
our students?
    So we need to be creative about creating pipeline programs, 
ensuring that our students have pathways in our K-12 systems to 
get into the higher education space around that social, 
emotional support or degrees in school counseling, social work.
    That is critically important. Not only do we have to 
rethink our organizational structure for our schools, but we 
also have to create clear pipelines for our students who are in 
school now to think of themselves as future mental health 
professionals.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you so much for that and for your emphasis 
on it. And we know this has been a time that has really 
inflicted great trauma, and, as always, even more so on low-
income children and children of color. We look at nearly 40,000 
children in this country have lost at least one parent, and 
Black children account for 20 percent of those kids.
    And we know that trauma is at the base of sometimes 
behavioral issues at school. And the previous administration 
rescinded Obama-era guidance on disciplinary practice that 
warned schools they may be violating Federal civil rights if 
one racial group was overrepresented in disciplinary actions 
taken.
    As Secretary of Education, will you restore that guidance 
on school discipline and update it to address policing in 
schools?
    Secretary Cardona. Yeah, I remember being an assistant 
superintendent when I read that and was shocked, because our 
efforts were really to try to reduce disparities in 
exclusionary practices. We know students of color, students 
with disabilities are targeted differently, and discrimination 
of any form is unacceptable, including of our LGBTQ and trans 
students.
    So, yes, this is a high priority for me to make sure that 
all students have a fair shake. Yes, we are going to make sure 
that accountability is there. We are going to make sure that 
education and support to our systems are there.
    And that is what this American Families Plan and American 
Rescue Plan can do, training to help our educators understand 
the differences of what trauma looks like and what poor 
behavior looks like so that we can meet the needs of our 
students where they are, especially after this pandemic.
    With regard to your question about school resource officers 
in schools, listen, this is one that I am going to need more 
information. I have seen examples of where it is very helpful 
to have members of the school community in the school helping 
the learning happen, including police officers, resource 
officers. But I have also seen examples where it worsens the 
disparities in exclusionary practices. So more to come on that, 
but I definitely want to hear more.
    Ms. Clark. And in my few remaining seconds, I cannot tell 
you what it means to have an administration that understands 
the value of early education.
    Most of that funding and oversight resides in HHS. If you 
could just briefly tell us how we can support your work in 
collaboration around early ed with Health and Human Services.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    The research and the practice around early childhood 
education, there is a huge gap there. And for us, it is really 
about making sure we are creating that culture of understanding 
of how important early childhood education is in our country 
for our young learners.
    We know students that have access to high-quality 
instructional programs at the early ages do better in high 
school. They get honors courses. Their potential for college is 
greater.
    So continue to beat that drum with us, make sure that we 
are supporting programs that have high quality, and making sure 
that as the money makes its way to the States that they are 
being invested in high-quality programs. That is how you can 
support.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you.
    Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Fleischmann.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Secretary, congratulations, Secretary. I do want to 
briefly acknowledge that this is National Teacher Appreciation 
Week. I hope you and my friends on both sides of the dais will 
acknowledge our great American teachers in their great efforts.
    Mr. Secretary, in my previous efforts on this subcommittee, 
for years I have worked in conjunction with colleagues across 
the aisle and with outside stakeholders to provide STEM 
education opportunities to rural and low-income communities.
    Most recent data shows that 3.5 million STEM-related jobs 
will need to be filled by 2025 in order to maintain a stable 
workforce. It is imperative that we continue to support public-
private partnerships to close the skills gap and cultivate a 
diverse workforce.
    My first question, sir: As we begin to reopen schools, how 
do you believe Congress could help in your efforts to increase 
STEM and computer science education in low-income and rural 
communities? And what is the administration doing to promote 
public-private partnerships in this area, sir?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that question.
    And you are absolutely right. I think, if there is anything 
that stood out in topics that I have had conversations with 
elected officials at the State and at the national level, it is 
the need for us to do more there. I really feel we need to 
evolve our systems to make that clearer pathways into the 
workforce a reality for students starting in middle school.
    And I have had experience on a workforce council where we 
brought our workforce partners, our CEOs, around the table with 
higher education, with our K-12 leaders, to come up with 
strategies to make sure that we have sustainable plans to do 
that. And I look forward, as Secretary of Education, to really 
moving the needle on that.
    I am really passionate about that. I think that has to 
blend K-12 expertise with higher education expertise with 
workforce partners.
    So you are absolutely right, we need to listen to our 
workforce partners by have them have a seat at our table when 
we are planning, because regionally really is where we can get 
the most bang for our buck. When we know what the needs are 
regionally we can make internship experiences together, we can 
develop curriculum with our partners in the workforce. There is 
a lot of room for growth there in this country, and I look 
forward to leading that.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you.
    And as a followup to that, Mr. Secretary, I am sure you are 
aware, the STEM Master Teacher Corps was authorized by the 
Every Student Succeeds Act but has not yet been funded. I would 
just respectfully request that the administration work with my 
friends in both houses and in both parties to fund that.
    A followup question, sir. Girls Who Code reported around 74 
percent of middle school girls express interest in STEM, yet 
only 0.4 percent of high school girls choose to pursue these 
interests in college.
    In order to diversify the personnel, how can we better 
monitor girls who are already interested in STEM, sir?
    Secretary Cardona. That is a great question, and it shows 
how our K-12 system needs to evolve to the needs of our 
communities. And if they are interested in it early in their 
education career, how are we losing them by the high school 
years?
    So we have to do a better job connecting our female 
students out into the field, looking at job potential, looking 
at career pathways earlier. We have to be more assertive, more 
aggressive, ensuring that they understand that these options 
exist for them as well. We should also bring in mentors that 
are in the STEM field to come in and talk to our students and 
create programs intended not to have that slide off.
    So you are highlighting work that I am pretty passionate 
about and I look forward to doing as Secretary of Education.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Secretary Cardona, in closing, I just want to say that many 
of these STEM programs do require in-person lab classes. I hope 
that you will work with us, with the administration, to 
diligently, safely reopen our schools and our economy.
    And, Madam Chair, I thank you and I yield back.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Frankel.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being with us today. I have a 
comment and then I do have some questions.
    I am sure you are aware that women have really suffered the 
brunt of the economic harm of this pandemic, losing the 
majority of jobs.
    This week the Georgetown Center on Education and the 
Workforce released a report that 90 percent of traditional 
infrastructure jobs go to men.
    So I just want to urge you, in your conversations with the 
President and the Vice President and others, that you not only 
advocate for the inclusion of women in traditional 
infrastructure jobs, but really emphasize the importance of 
investing and creating and improving the pay for new childcare 
slots, elder care, and especially the early education, which I 
know is in your area. And thank you. We are hoping you will be 
a good advocate for us.
    Question. We know that the issue of sexual violence on 
campuses has been a significant health issue. Unfortunately, 
many of us believe that the last administration took us 
backwards in terms of keeping sexual violence--diminishing it 
on campus because of a change in Title IX rules.
    Can you give us an update where your Department is in the 
process of rescinding those rules and issuing new guidance that 
actually protects victims and survivors?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Congresswoman Frankel, first 
of all, for your comment.
    You are absolutely right. When we talk about the inequities 
that were exacerbated by this pandemic, women have had a harder 
time recovering from this, because in many cases it has 
affected their jobs and when we talk about childcare and the 
needs there.
    The American Families Plan hopes to address that. But I 
absolutely agree with you that as we are thinking about 
recovery as a country, we need to continue to make sure that we 
are providing opportunities for jobs for women as well.
    With regard to the question that you asked about Title IX, 
part of this process--and we are looking forward to having 
information as soon as possible because I know folks are 
waiting for it--but where we are in the process now is in the 
listening phase. As you know, public comment is critically 
important for us to make sure that whatever we put forth takes 
into account the needs and the concerns expressed by those we 
serve.
    So we are in that process, and that is a very important 
part of the process. Once we are done with that, we look 
forward to moving quickly to make sure we have guidance out 
there, because, like you, I agree that sexual discrimination or 
any type of harassment has no place in our college campuses.
    Ms. Frankel. Mr. Secretary, do you actually have proposed 
rules that are being commented on?
    Secretary Cardona. There is a comment period now that is 
taking place, yes.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you.
    And I know during the pandemic there was a flexibility on 
standardized tests and so forth. So we have heard from some 
teachers who think that these flexibilities should continue.
    Do you have a comment on that? Is the administration going 
to try to extend those flexibilities?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    Yes, the issue of assessing students at this point in the 
pandemic is a really tough one. It reminds me of the decision 
we had to make last July about reopening schools. There is no 
one way of doing it that works for everyone.
    With that said, as we are thinking about how to distribute 
$130 billion in the American Rescue Plan to our schools, any 
little bit of data helps so that I can ensure that we are 
closing equity gaps through those funds. So if this group of 
students was hit harder, I want to make sure that more funds go 
there.
    But I know teachers across the country don't need a 
standardized assessment to tell them how their students are 
doing. There is not one teacher that needs that to tell them 
how their students are doing. They know.
    With that said, when we are making policies and when we are 
distributing millions and millions of dollars it helps to know 
which communities need double the money, so that when I see 
resources being used to make class sizes of 9 in one class 
where other classes may have 20, I understand that, based on 
how the students performed, the impact of the pandemic.
    So I recognize it is not an easy one. And in moving 
forward, because your question was about extending them, I hope 
to have robust conversation about how to evolve our assessments 
to make sure they measure what they are supposed to measure.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    A little bit in that last question, obviously throughout 
the pandemic we have heard--I have heard from parents nonstop 
who have struggled to help their kids during the remote 
learning, and whether it was we are seeing incredibly scary 
increases in mental health challenges and suicidal either 
ideation or attempts to just learning loss.
    I was looking at a McKinsey study from the end of last year 
talking about learning loss experienced by Black students was 
about 10.3 months. Latina--well, they say LatinX. That is a 
personal thing. I hate the term LatinX, as someone of Latin 
descent. So Latina students, 9.2 months. And students from low-
income backgrounds 12.4 months. And that was at the end of last 
year. Could be even greater.
    And I thought it was really interesting. The Seattle Times 
has been following, obviously, the school closures issue 
significantly. I think it was just last week Seattle teachers 
finally came back into the classroom after the Governor, the 
Democratic Governor, announced that we could reopen schools 
months ago. And he even put teachers near the front of the line 
with regard to getting vaccinations, recognizing you need to 
make sure they are safe if you are asking them to go back into 
the classroom. All of those things I applauded.
    However, the story that I just found talks about how 
basically those districts that primarily serve White children 
and districts in counties where a majority of them voted for 
our previous President reopened more quickly to students than 
the more liberal-leaning or racially diverse communities.
    And, interestingly, it didn't always follow health 
indicators. Like the analysis found that the counties with the 
highest COVID death rates had a higher average proportion of 
students in classes than the rest of the State, meaning that 
the death or the CDC recommendations didn't always get taken 
into account when they were deciding how to put kids back in 
school.
    And I really wanted to see, in light of this learning loss, 
especially among our most vulnerable, especially among those 
that the whole public education system, in my mind, is really 
geared towards, like that is the goal, is that no child is less 
than any other child. So how do we make sure we catch them up?
    Is your Department more aggressively pursuing making sure 
that--one day a week is not good enough for some of these kids 
in some of these districts. And, again, I noted our Democratic 
Governor has really stepped up to the plate to say: You need to 
do this. And yet, they are still not complying.
    How are you going to take on some of those bigger, more 
intransigent systems that are not geared towards the kids' best 
needs?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that question. And I 
appreciate the way you laid it out.
    I agree with you wholeheartedly. The best equity level we 
have is in-person learning now--not the fall, now. And we need 
to do everything to get our students in. Every day that they 
are not in the classroom is a day wasted to have social-
emotional engagement, to have that access to a teacher, a 
caring school environment.
    Where, as you mentioned at the beginning of your comments, 
we know students are suffering due to the trauma that they have 
experienced. They need to be in the classrooms.
    What we have done is work with our partners at CDC to get 
guidance. We had the Reopening School Summit. We have over 
1,100 entries of best practices that were submitted. We a 
clearinghouse with about 200 practices that districts could 
learn from one another.
    But we are also building up a system very quickly to get 
new data to make sure that we are reaching out proactively, 
talking to the governors, talking to the commissioners, talking 
to the superintendents, if necessary, sending a team over there 
to support them, because we can't wait.
    So I am very passionate about that. I agree with you 
wholeheartedly. We need to get the solution right away.
    Unfortunately, though, what I have seen in my tour is some 
of these urban centers have buildings that are 120 years old, 
that haven't had a ventilation system looked at in years.
    So there is a lot of disparate need that we need to 
address. But I do think that you are passionate, and I share it 
with you.
    [Children heard on webcast.]
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. My goodness. Always when it is my 
turn.
    Secretary Cardona. It is awesome. I love it. This is the 
education budget, so it is very appropriate.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Well, the other piece of that I just 
can't get over is that I feel like it really is the most 
vulnerable who are going to pay this price, while we are 
protecting every other institution in the system of education. 
And it frustrates me that we have put a lot of money, $10 
billion to the States to help with upgrading HVAC systems, and 
to hear people not take advantage of those.
    We could send all the money in the world there, unless 
there are some sort of teeth, I think those kids are going to 
continue to pay. And I want to understand that you have got 
their back, even over some of the adults in the system.
    Secretary Cardona. Exactly. And thank you for sharing that. 
And I want to continue to have conversations with you about 
what you are seeing, what you are hearing.
    But I cannot agree any more. We need to advocate for 
children here. We need to keep students at the center of the 
conversation.
    You are absolutely right, some kids are being hurt more 
than others. We need to be aggressive about reopening now, 
providing whatever supports they need. So support and 
accountability have to be equal here.
    And I totally agree with you, the plans that the States are 
providing within the next 3 weeks must include how they are 
going to address equity and how they are going to engage 
stakeholders. We need to get our kids back right away.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you for that.
    Appreciate it, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congresswoman Bustos.
    Mrs. Bustos. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And, Mr. Secretary, great to see you again. I do want to 
publicly thank you for visiting Illinois last month with the 
First Lady. It was really good to have you at Sauk Valley 
Community College.
    Today, if I may, I would like to talk a little bit about 
teacher shortages. I gave you a little handout when you were in 
our region that went over a little bit about this.
    But the American Families Plan, it is just so great to see 
that President Biden is requesting doubling the yearly TEACH 
Grant award from $4,000 to $8,000. And that is for students who 
commit to teaching a high-need subject in a high-poverty school 
district for 4 years. I think it is terrific. So thank you.
    I also want to applaud the $2.8 billion for teacher 
residency programs and the $1.6 billion for grants for teachers 
to obtain additional certification.
    So that plays into helping to address teacher shortages, a 
major, major problem in my home State of Illinois where right 
now, as we are having this conversation, school districts have 
about 4,200 unfilled positions.
    Think about that. Shortage of teachers, of 
paraprofessionals, of other licensed staff. In the 
congressional district that I serve, we have 400 vacant 
positions. And that is a lot.
    So if you can talk a little bit about the American Families 
Plan and how that will impact addressing this teacher shortage 
issue.
    Secretary Cardona. Sure. First off, let me say Sauk Valley 
gets it right. If you want to see an example of how a community 
college could lift a community and provide pathways for careers 
that exist now, visit Sauk Valley. It is like a commercial. 
Really, I am smiling because it was one of the best visits I 
have had. Thank you for what you are doing over there. And 
thank you, Sauk Valley, for what you are doing.
    You are absolutely right, teacher shortages. But we could 
throw money there, but I think what I don't want missed here is 
we have a President now that values education, understands the 
role of education. And together we need to lift up the 
profession where it needs to be. We need to honor our 
educators, not just during Teacher Appreciation Week, but we 
need to make sure that it is a viable profession.
    Let me tell you, 30 States, a midcareer teacher, in a 
family of four, will qualify for Federal assistance. That is 
unacceptable. That is unacceptable in this profession.
    So we need to create better pathway programs for our 
students to become educators.
    You mentioned paraeducators. Paraeducators show up every 
single day working hard for our students in those schoolhouses, 
in those communities. Let's make them teachers.
    How can we create innovative programming to give our 
paraeducators or climate specialists an opportunity to become 
certified teachers, to then fill those shortage areas where we 
need support for our students that can't read, and reading 
recovery, or ESL services?
    We have to be innovative. And I am hoping, now that there 
are financial resources, that we have bold leadership 
strategies to really fill those gaps.
    But the best way to do that is to really lift the 
profession and make sure that the students that we are serving 
now feel welcomed in our schools so that they can consider 
themselves teachers in the future.
    Mrs. Bustos. So as far as teachers' salary, Mr. Secretary, 
that was actually my next question. In fact, let's see, let 
me--so in 2019, in the State of Illinois, we had more than 
5,500 K through 12 teachers earning less than $40,000 a year, 
to your point. So I am just wondering what we can do more at 
the Federal level.
    Just earlier this year I introduced something--again, this 
is in the handout that I gave you, Mr. Secretary--but we 
introduced something out of my office called the Retaining 
Educators Takes Added Investment Now Act--it spells out 
RETAIN--and along with other provisions that it has in there.
    It creates a fully refundable tax credit for teachers in 
Title I schools. The credits start at $5,800 and ramp up to 
$11,600 over the years to help retain staff.
    So I am wondering what else--and I hope that you will be 
supportive, please take a look at that. I am hoping those on 
this subcommittee will be supportive.
    But is there anything else, any other investment that we 
should put into programs that fight the teacher shortage and 
help the pay increase, increasing Title I funding to help 
school districts increase teacher pay? Just curious as to any 
other ideas you have specifically on how we can address that.
    Secretary Cardona. Sure. Thank you for sharing that. I look 
forward to having more conversation with you about that.
    Mrs. Bustos. Please.
    Secretary Cardona. And listing best practices. Because it 
does take everyone, at the State level, at the Federal level, 
but at the local level also. We need to think creatively with 
this opportunity that we have to hit the reset button.
    So some strategies--yours is a great idea. I talked about 
the pathway program to make sure that our paraeducators have an 
opportunity.
    But I think we need to do a better job, starting in middle 
school, looking at pathways for teachers for our students. But 
if our students have a good experience, they are more likely to 
want to do that.
    Competitive salaries are needed. We need to really make 
sure that we are giving teachers a competitive salary and an 
opportunity to continue to grow.
    This is not just about the salary. It is about honoring the 
profession by giving professional learning opportunities, 
advancement opportunities, additional higher education 
opportunities for our educators. It is really about making sure 
that we are taking care of the teachers once they choose that 
profession as well as recruiting them.
    I look forward to discussing more with you on that as well.
    Mrs. Bustos. I do too, Mr. Secretary. Thank you very much.
    My time is up. And, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congressman Moolenaar.
    Mr. Moolenaar. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    And, Mr. Secretary, good morning, and thanks for being here 
with us and for sharing your experience with us. And very much 
appreciate your service in education, both at the State, now at 
the Federal level, as well as at the local level, and being a 
hands-on educator.
    I wanted to talk with you a little bit, as we have gone 
through this global pandemic, obviously it has affected a lot 
of what we have been seeing in the area of education. And it 
seems like there have been a lot of people innovating, trying 
to make things work and using creative ways, whether it is 
online learning, different choice options.
    What have we learned through this process that may increase 
more innovation, opportunities for parents to tailor programs 
that meet the needs of their individual students? Any thoughts 
on that?
    Secretary Cardona. Yes. Thank you, Congressman Moolenaar.
    You brought up something that is really important. Let's 
not go back to what it was in March 2020, because that system 
that we had before wasn't serving all kids equitably.
    So you brought up blended learning. While I think students 
need to be back in the classroom, the role of blended learning 
I think should be always a part of how we educate students.
    How we integrate social-emotional well-being of students 
needs to be something that we think about more. It should be 
more intrinsic in the curriculum, in the experience of 
students, versus wait for a student to have issues and then 
react to it.
    I have seen creative ways for students in my experience in 
Connecticut. So if this is a classroom right now, it doesn't 
necessarily have to be taught or the options that the district 
provides could be wider, because there might a teacher in a 
neighboring community where if two communities work together to 
share teacher expertise, we can offer more options for 
students.
    How beneficial is that for our rural students who maybe 
don't have the same choice of classes because there are limited 
people in their community that can teach it?
    We need to be bold, we need to think outside of the box. 
And I encourage that for States, to be creative with the 
funding, to make sure that the programming that we give is 
better than what it was last year.
    Mr. Moolenaar. I appreciate that. And as someone who 
represents a rural district, I have seen the importance of 
rural broadband and the need to expand that to meet our 
educational needs for our students, and have introduced 
legislation called the BOOST Act that hopefully will help with 
that process, and it is very bipartisan legislation.
    I also wanted to get your thoughts, there are people 
sometimes who mistakenly refer to charter schools as private 
schools. To me, they are part of our educational public school 
framework, often offer opportunities for innovation and 
targeted opportunities for families who may not have other 
opportunities.
    I just wanted to get your thoughts on charter schools, the 
role that they play, and educational choice in general.
    Secretary Cardona. Sure. So I will speak from experience in 
Connecticut. Some of the greatest examples of innovation I saw 
from charter schools, but I have also seen amazing innovation 
from traditional schools. Really they are hubs of innovation. 
And I have seen them work and I have seen education where it 
hasn't worked. And I have struggled with the accountability in 
some places. But I felt the same way about other, traditional 
schools as well.
    So they provide an option for students. And oftentimes they 
are targeted toward a specific learning area or a specific 
need. So they are part of the portfolio of choices.
    But, again, my thing is I don't ever want to support a 
system of winners and losers, and I want to make sure that all 
schools provide an opportunity for students to get a high-
quality education. I don't support one school at the expense of 
another school. That is my position on that.
    Mr. Moolenaar. Sure. I appreciate that.
    And I also just want to get your thoughts on The 1619 
Project. I recognize that you are not advocating for that. You 
are not saying that we should have a Federal curriculum.
    But it does appear that in the guidance in the Federal 
Register, it did mention The 1619 Project, which according to 
the editor in chief of The New York Times said the aim of the 
project is to reframe American history.
    And I think that raises a lot of concerns about 
revisionism, of sort of breaking down the framework of how we 
have taught civics education, and as you pointed out, the 
importance of building unity.
    And I just want to make sure that you are aware of that and 
get your thoughts on that.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative. And I 
appreciate you sharing your concern. And I am open to having 
more conversation with you to hear your perspective.
    What I will say is, listen, yes, it touched a pain point 
for so many because it shows how divided we are as a Nation in 
some places.
    I really feel that civics education is something that there 
is bipartisan support for that. We recognize that we need to do 
that. And I feel very strongly, very strongly that when done 
well, it should unite us under one flag, one country. And we 
can do that while providing students with opportunities to look 
at materials and look at different perspectives.
    But, again, education in general should really unite us and 
lift us as a country. And I feel confident that our educators 
can do it. But I understand what you are saying, that it does 
bring up divisions that maybe existed already, and we have to 
be conscious of that as we move forward in education.
    Mr. Moolenaar. All right. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Thank you, Madam Chair. And I yield back.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    And welcome, Secretary Cardona.
    I am glad to have a Secretary of Education who believes in 
the power of public education and is willing to support and 
protect our students in the public education system.
    I am also encouraged that the President has continuously 
spoken to the issues of equity and eliminating disparities.
    With regard to what our children have been educated in, I 
am very much aware of the fact that the experience of the 
African-American building of this country has been woefully 
inadequately dealt with in our public education system, and 
that is something that we need to do something about.
    And if we are seeking to look for an expansive civics 
program that recognizes the contributions that other 
communities, be they indigenous communities, Latin communities, 
Black communities, their contribution to making this government 
great, the opportunity for students to learn at a very young 
age to respect and to recognize that these are communities of 
dignity and demand and warrant respect, that is a good thing.
    Because our children become our adults, and one thing we 
don't want is to have a whole bunch of uninformed adults that 
seize upon the Capitol of the United States again, wrongfully 
guided, wrongfully coerced into doing things that were anti-
democratic and were also anti-unification of this country.
    Mr. Secretary, do you believe that there is any such thing 
as separate but equal in education? And that is kind of a yes 
or a no.
    Secretary Cardona. You know, we need to provide inclusive 
opportunities for students.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. So do you believe that you can acquire 
equal and separate?
    Secretary Cardona. No, I don't.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Okay. Thank you. Because I understand 
that there is going to be a huge investment in our underserved, 
underperforming schools.
    I am particularly aware of the whole Abbott experience in 
the State of New Jersey, I am sure you are too, where for 
decades we have been putting additional money into urban 
schools that have been underperformed, that are intensely 
populated by impoverished children from impoverished families, 
and how all of that investment has not yielded the kind of 
equality and outcomes that we are expecting.
    So I would like to know what this administration's plan is 
to desegregate our schools, to ensure that there is equity of 
education, and to ensure that students, irrespective of the ZIP 
Code from which they come, will have access to good, diverse, 
and high-performing schools.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for your passion. And let me 
just comment really quickly on what you said earlier about the 
experiences of not only African American, Latinos, but also 
AAPI and women in our country's history is critically important 
for all students to hear, and not just for those students who 
are of that background, for all students to see----
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. And not to be celebrated one month a 
year every year, throughout their learning experience. 
Absolutely.
    Secretary Cardona. Correct. Thank you for that.
    But we have in this budget plan also a request for $100 
million to help diversify our schools, provide programming 
where students learn in a diverse setting.
    I benefit as a father from having my children learn in a 
diverse environment. I can tell you there is not a price I 
could put on that. For me, it is really important that my 
students--my children, my own personal children--learn in an 
environment where they see people that look like them but also 
people that are very different from them.
    That is what we want to do to prepare our students for a 
world that is like that. There is an investment in that in this 
budget plan and there is a strong belief in this 
administration, in this Department, that there is value for our 
students in that.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. I know that, Mr. Secretary, and I need 
to see how we intend to accomplish that, because all the good 
intentions in the world need to be followed by a plan of action 
and a degree of accountability. And that hasn't been the 
situation. So I really look forward to that.
    One quick question. States have to have their plans in to 
reopen schools by June the 7th. How soon thereafter do you 
think those schools will have the resources to actually 
implement the plans?
    Secretary Cardona. We want to get the funding out as soon 
as possible. So if we can get them in June, we are going to 
move to move it along. There should be no delay.
    What we want to ensure in that June 7 plan is that there is 
aim for equity, as was mentioned today on this call, and also 
ensuring that stakeholders are a part of that process. Parents 
should be in the conversation at the beginning.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you.
    Madam Chair, I realize my time is up. If there is a second 
round, I certainly do want to talk to the Secretary about some 
other issues, particularly impacting African-American students, 
Black students in particular.
    Thank you very much. And I yield back.
    Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    The Chair. We will have a second round. It will be 3 
minutes.
    Congressman Cline.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you, Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking Member 
Cole, for holding this hearing.
    Secretary Cardona, thank you for being here.
    I agree with your comments that education can serve as a 
great equalizer. We have to ensure that we encourage equality 
of opportunity, not equity of outcome however.
    My home State of Virginia has a long history of being a 
leader on fighting for equality on the educational front. 
Barbara Rose Johns of Virginia led a walkout at the Robert 
Russa Moton High School at age 16, which initiated a case 
called Davis v. Prince Edward. This later became one of the 
five cases that the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed in Brown v. 
Board of Education of Topeka when it declared segregation 
unconstitutional.
    I am grateful for her contributions and look forward to 
working with you to ensure that all students have that equality 
of opportunity for a high-quality education.
    Additionally, I appreciate your recognition of the 
unprecedented increase in spending that President Biden has 
proposed. Apparently, math was not his strong suit when it came 
to his education, because this budget that he has put forward 
is so far out of whack. After so much extraordinary emergency 
spending, it is quite ridiculous.
    The President's skinny budget proposes nearly $103 billion 
for Department of Education programs, which is an increase of 
almost $30 billion. That totals 41 percent above fiscal year 
2021 enacted level. This level of an increase in spending in 
the same year that Congress has allocated extensive funds to 
mitigate the effects of COVID is highly irresponsible.
    When I served in the Virginia General Assembly we were 
required to balance our budget. As lawmakers, we must make 
difficult decisions and determine how to most appropriately 
spend taxpayers' money with sound authority and reason.
    With that, I will ask you, Mr. Secretary, much of the 
Nation's conversation in recent years has been centered around 
student debt, which surpassed over $1.75 trillion in 2020.
    This is a problem, but canceling it is not the solution. 
That would devalue others' choices who determine that going to 
community college for all or part of their education or that 
completing an apprenticeship, which would allow them to start 
in the workforce debt free, was the right decision for them. 
Others have determined that their best path was through a 4-
year degree, while incurring some debt.
    With many options that are flexible to students' needs, the 
Federal Government should not be picking and choosing certain 
life choices to pay for out of the paychecks of others.
    What will you do as Secretary to encourage students to look 
at all options available to them as a path toward a successful 
career?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative.
    And I want to be very clear. We could talk about individual 
strategies. I want to make sure that what we are a part of 
right now and what we are asking for is a transformational 
shift of how we are looking at education, to make sure that it 
serves as the foundation of our country's growth. As the 
President stated in his address, other countries are not 
waiting.
    So there have been years of disinvestment in education, and 
what we are trying to do now is correct that. So for those 
students who have been underserved for years, generationally, 
we are seeing the symptoms of that. And I think intervention 
costs more than prevention. I look at a good education system 
is the best way to lift our country.
    With regard to the student debt, we have to do more in the 
agency to make sure we are providing pathways to affordability 
for our students. And I think public service loan forgiveness, 
ensuring that there is a good return on investment for our 
students that go to college, ensuring that we are giving them 
every opportunity to be successful in college and not have a 
mountain of debt, is to me just as important as revisiting the 
loan forgiveness process.
    So by hiring Richard Cordray, by bringing talent on board 
that understand that, that we have to advocate for students in 
all that we do, I feel confident that we are going to get 
there.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you.
    Your Department announced last month it was extending 
COVID-19 relief to defaulted borrowers who have legacy loans 
under the Federal Family Education Loan Program.
    While that decision was expected, you also announced a new 
requirement that was not, that guaranty agencies move newly 
defaulted loans to the Department.
    If the goal is to help these borrowers, this new 
requirement will not accomplish that. These State and nonprofit 
agencies have relationships with these borrowers and can move 
quickly to remove the default and restore their credit record.
    In contrast, if the Department takes these loans, it will 
be well into 2022 before borrowers see any relief remotely 
close to what guaranty agencies can do for them and in an 
accelerated timeframe.
    As well, transitioning these loans to new for-profit 
services will only add to borrower confusion, already 
intensified because of new policies and procedures as a result 
of the pandemic.
    Given all of this, my question to you is, would you be 
willing to revisit this mandatory assignment proposal and allow 
nonprofit and State guaranty agencies to continue doing what 
they do best and, frankly, were created to do? If not, I worry 
these borrowers will not be a priority for the Department and 
critical relief further delayed.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative. And I will be 
quick because I know the time is up.
    In fact, the reason why we brought them in is because we 
want to make sure that we are advocating for them and that we 
are keeping them at the center of the conversations and making 
the decisions that are in their best interest. Thank you, 
though.
    Mr. Cline. All right. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Congresswoman Lawrence.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you.
    I reintroduced the Pell to Grad Act, legislation that would 
extend students' lifetime Pell Grant eligibility to 16 
semesters, and it will allow them to receive the Pell Grant 
award during their undergraduate education to utilize their 
remaining eligibility for a graduate degree.
    Several of my colleagues have referenced the burden of 
student loan debt. I believe this legislation is a meaningful 
first step toward promoting access to postsecondary education.
    So I want to commend the Biden administration for proposing 
the largest one-time increase in this program since 2009. I 
want to congratulate you and welcome you to this seat, someone 
that I feel very confident can rise to the occasion.
    So my question to you, can you explain the benefits that 
expanding lifetime Pell Grant eligibility could have for 
students, especially those able to use their remaining 
eligibility for a graduate degree?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you very much.
    And I agree, for some students 16 semesters is not enough, 
and we need to support them. For many of these students it is 
first-gen students who are navigating that space for the first 
time and are charting a new course in addressing what their 
needs are, and sometimes it takes longer.
    So I support that, and I thank you for recognizing that. 
The system needs to evolve to the needs of the students and not 
the other way around.
    Pell Grants, as you mentioned, this is a historic allotment 
towards that. In 1979, I think it was 75 percent of tuition was 
covered for in-state colleges by Pell. That is significant. Now 
it is like about 25 percent. So it didn't keep up with 
inflation, clearly. And for many students, when they see that, 
they make the decision not to go to college.
    So we have to do something about that. We have to give 
access, equity to higher education. We know there is greater 
earning potential. So this goes a long way to doing that.
    So it is something that I know that, for many students, it 
is going to be the reason why they go to college. For other 
students, it is the reason why they are buying a house or 
contributing to the economy by being able to do some of those 
things that they couldn't do if they were burdened with debt. 
Really breaking the cycle of poverty is what it is.
    Mrs. Lawrence. So before I close, I want to touch on our 
efforts to return our students back to school. And I believe 
your decision to provide free social and emotional learning 
course while you were serving as the commissioner of education 
was incredibly timely, considering what we are going through 
with remote and hybrid learning.
    One of my biggest concerns is how we can ensure that 
students have the resource that they need to readjust following 
this year of pandemic, including access to mental health 
services.
    Unfortunately, we have seen the number of suicides go up 
and just all of the social issues, abuse and other things, that 
our children have been going through.
    How will you use your experience as a commissioner during 
this pandemic to help shape the Department's guidance for use 
by schools across the country, particularly in the area of 
mental health?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that.
    We know students have been hit hard. And we have to be 
prepared, when we reopen the doors and turn on the lights, to 
make sure that we are meeting the students of today. They are 
different than the students of March 2020. Our students have 
experienced family loss, they experienced joblessness of their 
families, they haven't seen their loved ones in over a year in 
some cases. We have to be prepared to meet their needs.
    So instead of just an additional 15, 20 minutes with the 
school counselor for some students, we need to infuse social-
emotional well-being into the curriculum, into the experience 
of every child. We need to make mental health support more 
accessible and remove the stigma that goes around that. We need 
to provide better professional learning opportunities for all 
educators to know what to look for, the signs.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Secretary, this is the area I want to jump 
into. We know that we do not have enough mental health 
professionals to meet that goal. And I am so glad you have that 
vision. And I would love to talk to you at another time about 
how we build the workforce of mental health professionals to 
address the children in our schools.
    And I don't want to leave without talking about student 
debt. Black women carry the largest amount of student debt in 
America. So when we talk about the Pell Grant, we talk about 
other student loan challenges, we have to recognize that Black 
women are carrying the brunt of that.
    Thank you so much. My time is up.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    The Chair. Congressman Harder.
    Mr. Harder. Thank you so much, Chairwoman DeLauro.
    And thank you, Secretary Cardona, for being here.
    I have spoken previously about the importance of career and 
technical education and how those programs really play a vital 
role in helping folks develop the skills that they need that 
are in high demand in our current labor market.
    In a district like mine, only about 17 percent of adults 
have a 4-year college degree; 83 percent don't. And so if all 
we are doing is telling folks that the only route to the middle 
class is through a 4-year college degree, we are going to be 
leaving out the vast majority of a lot of folks across the 
country. Even as we are doing more to accelerate people going 
to college, we can't forget about everybody else.
    It is something that we have been working on a lot. I know 
there are a lot of challenges with expanding the availability 
of access to CTE and skills programs.
    I introduced a bill called the trades and career education 
skills package last Congress. I will be doing so again. That 
package is very focused on trying to create more opportunities 
for hands-on career education starting in elementary school, 
going on through high school and community college, really 
focusing on partnerships with local industries to make sure 
that those students are learning locally relevant skills, as 
well as expanding access for Federal scholarship for short-
term, high-quality certificate programs.
    Frankly, I would have liked to see career and technical 
education discussed more explicitly in the President's 
discretionary budget proposal, and that is something I hope to 
see when the full budget is released.
    My question, Mr. Secretary, is given the critical role that 
CTE plays in communities like mine, how do you envision the 
Department of Education will support scaling these programs up?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative Harder.
    I can't agree with you more. I was a graduate of a 
technical high school. I learned automotive. And I chose to go 
into teaching. But I see the value of giving students options 
and connecting those options to workforce needs in the 
community. And I am sure in California there are so many 
opportunities to do that.
    So here are some very tangible things that I think should 
happen.
    We should take our schools, especially those schools with 
labs, and create a second shift. Beautiful building, let's 
create a second shift, no reason why the lights are off at 3 
o'clock, and give underemployed families, parents, an 
opportunity to go and get a credential. We need to connect that 
with the learning that the students are getting.
    We need to think about how our community colleges are 
setting up shop in our high schools after hours. So from 3 to 8 
p.m. we have credentialing programs so underemployed adults 
have a second chance to go back and get their credential, get 
their degree, and go back into the community.
    So we need to think outside of the box.
    With this funding and these resources, we have the 
opportunity to really think big on this. And I agree with you, 
we need to make sure that we are not just saying 4 years of 
college or bust. There are so many other opportunities.
    I look forward to learning more from you, working with you 
to expand opportunities, because at this agency that is one of 
my goals, to make sure we are doing a better job creating 
pathways, not only for our students but for our adults who want 
another opportunity at learning.
    Mr. Harder. Terrific. Thank you.
    It is wild to me that we offer Pell Grants and other 
scholarships for some programs, but if you want to be a 
maintenance mechanic, which is a job where there is a desperate 
shortage of in my community, it pays six figures, it is a 
really fantastic career, but you are not eligible for the same 
type of scholarships if you want to go on that career path.
    Would you consider utilizing Pell Grants and/or any other 
funding streams to better support individuals to pursue 
certificates and other certifications in that space or other 
spaces like that?
    Secretary Cardona. Yes, definitely.
    As I said before, we have to evolve our systems to make 
sure that our policies are supporting students. Obviously, 
accountability has to be a part of it. We want to make sure our 
students are getting a good return on investment.
    But, yes, we have to make sure we are nimble to meet the 
demands that are out there and the needs of our learners. So, 
yes, I definitely would be in support of reviewing that a 
little bit more and getting more perspective on that, making 
sure we are serving our students the best we can, definitely.
    Mr. Harder. That is great to hear.
    One last question. I know early exposure to these skills 
programs has been shown to promote career readiness. You 
mentioned some ideas for programs at the high school level or 
earlier. What could we be doing to support students as early as 
possible?
    Obviously, not every student, and you are a perfect example 
of that, is going to take us up on that opportunity, but at 
least it gives folks an option if they decide to do it.
    How else can we be sort of supporting workforce development 
efforts as early as possible?
    Secretary Cardona. Sure. Thank you for that.
    So a couple of thoughts on that. Not only does it improve 
career readiness, but student engagement. Students learn better 
when they are doing things, when they are hands on.
    And we learned this year that schooling doesn't have to be 
in a schoolhouse. Maybe students early on go on trips and see 
what is happening in their community, what advanced 
manufacturing looks like in their community, or what STEM 
fields look like in their community. So we have to get students 
out a lot earlier.
    And we have to bring our partners in. Why not focus on 
getting some of our workforce partners on our boards of 
education to help shape the policy at the local level to make 
this something that is not just a fancy program for some 
students but infused as part of the program for all students?
    Mr. Harder. It is great to hear. I look forward to working 
with you on that. And thank you so much for appearing before 
the subcommittee.
    Madam Chair, I yield back the remainder of my time.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Everyone has been a through a 5-minute round. What I would 
like to do is to do a next round with 3 minutes and have people 
adhere to 3 minutes so we can get everyone's questions in.
    With that, Mr. Secretary, let me begin.
    This is about ACICS, the for-profit accreditor which was--
they were reinstated in 2018 by Secretary DeVos and the Trump 
administration.
    Now, this is the accreditor that was responsible for 
Education Corporation of America, Corinthian Colleges, ITT, the 
for-profit chains who precipitously closed their doors. There 
was Ronald Reagan National University, was accredited as an 
institution. They had no students or faculty.
    So accreditors are supposed to oversee quality, serve as 
gatekeepers, and they need to be removed when they fail in that 
responsibility.
    Now, the National Advisory Committee on Institutional 
Quality and Integrity has recommended that Federal recognition 
of ACICS be removed. Will the Department of Education reach a 
decision on whether to remove recognition? How will you ensure 
proper oversight of for-profit colleges?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Chair DeLauro.
    Yes, we stand by the decision. And we recognize that it is 
our responsibility to protect students by making sure that we 
remove folks that are not helping produce a good return on 
investment for our students.
    They are going to get their due process, and they should, 
but we stand by the decision to move in the direction that we 
did.
    The Chair. Okay.
    English learners, particularly challenging year. How will 
the Department's Office of English Language Acquisition work 
with States and districts to make sure these students are 
getting the support that they need.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    We need to do better than ever before. We need to see a new 
day for our office for multilingual learners. Going back to 
where we were is not good enough.
    Early childhood education is one. But language support 
services for students, there is such a gap between the practice 
and the research on that. We need to go back to what we know 
works best, honoring and valuing the native language, while 
lifting the second language so we can have multilingual 
learners.
    There is lot of work that has to be done. I look forward to 
engaging with that with my sleeves rolled up because this is 
important for our country.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    With the few minutes I have left, let me just say, in your 
conversation with Congressman Harder about utilizing schools in 
a different way, it would seem to me that we could use 
community schools in a way that these were open usually from 
early morning until 8 or 9 o'clock at night, that that might be 
a good vehicle for dealing with how we deal with new learning 
opportunities and workforce development efforts.
    Secretary Cardona. Absolutely. I think you are spot on, 
especially because families trust their child's teacher, they 
trust their child's principal, they know that school community, 
they feel comfortable there. We really need to rethink how we 
use our space.
    The Chair. Thank you. I once taught as a substitute teacher 
at the Dr. Conte Community School in New Haven, Connecticut.
    So with that, let me yield to my colleague, Congressman 
Cole.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I would have 
enjoyed that class, I am sure.
    Mr. Secretary, two quick questions.
    One, I am very heartened to hear about your determination 
in reopening schools full time. In my district, most of them 
have been functioning since August, in every case where full 
time was better than virtual.
    And, frankly, in one case, I was talking to the 
superintendent yesterday, he offered both options. About two-
thirds of the students came in on a regular basis, about a 
third did not. He said it is a dramatic difference between 
those that did. And he said, we are actually removing next year 
the option of going virtual.
    Have you thought about tying any of the distribution of 
money that is going to be under your authority to the 
restoration of 5-day education?
    Secretary Cardona. It is my expectation that by the fall 
all students have in-person learning options 5 days a week.
    I really--I want it now in the spring. But we will problem 
solve with folks. But we need to provide in-person learning 
opportunities for all students 5 days a week in the fall. That 
is my expectation. [inaudible] Withhold funds if they don't do 
it.
    Mr. Cole. Yeah. Well, I appreciate that. And I hope you 
again use whatever tools you have, because I think the 
evidence, both medically, for the health of the kids, and 
educationally is pretty clear.
    The second question I have also relates to distribution. I 
will be very candid with you, I think one of the problems that 
my side of the aisle had on the American Recovery Plan was the 
lack of information in the original legislation about how money 
would be distributed. Let me give you an example that doesn't 
relate to education.
    But we had a formula in the American CARES Act that 
distributed money on a per capita basis. It was changed in the 
American Recovery Act, and, frankly, it was changed in ways 
that the money was skewed heavily toward Blue States at the 
expense of Red States. There were actually 20-odd governors 
that protested this.
    So I am very interested, as you develop standards, what 
your criteria are going to be. It is an enormous amount of 
money, $130 billion at your disposal, your Department's 
disposal.
    What are the kinds of standards you will use? What kind of 
transparency will we have in seeing those standards before you 
actually begin to distribute those funds?
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that question.
    We have an opportunity, a once in a lifetime opportunity 
not only to support students, but to provide equitable 
opportunities for students and really address some of those 
issues that happened before.
    But we also have to be conscious of we are working--we are 
using taxpayer money. So we have to be as transparent as 
possible. We have to be clear about our intentions and be very 
purposeful when communicating what the money should be used 
for.
    We want to make sure we are addressing the pandemic impact. 
Some students were impacted more than others. That should be 
driving how decisions are being made, nothing else.
    Mr. Cole. As much as you could share that with us as you 
are developing them or get there, I think it would be very 
helpful to every member of the committee to have that 
information.
    So thank you very much.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    Mr. Cole. Again, I am going to live by my chairman's 
admonition. So thank you very much, and thank you again for 
your testimony.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Clark.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you. Thank you for the second round.
    Secretary Cardona, I would like to go back to some of the 
discussion that we have been having around a rule that followed 
President Biden's executive order which directed the Federal 
Government to pursue a comprehensive approach to advancing 
equity for all, especially people of color.
    And I wanted to give you a chance to address some of what 
my colleagues have raised, both here today and otherwise, about 
helping students connect with the history of our country, with 
the history of racism and the toxic roots of slavery.
    Can you tell us what is at the basis of this and how you 
hope that this education around the history of our country will 
be uniting and not dividing?
    Secretary Cardona. Right. So I think when we talk about 
disengaged youth, when we talk about exclusionary practices, 
disengaged families from school, we really need to look at 
those as symptoms of something greater. And I am speaking now 
from my years of experience in education as an educator at 
different levels.
    We need to do better to engage our students and our 
families in learning that is culturally responsive, that sees 
our students, sees their experience, validates their 
contributions to our country.
    I think if you do that all students benefit, not just the 
students whose history has been omitted or left out.
    So, again, I have seen it done. I have been a recipient of 
an educational system where when others are valued, I see how 
it builds our country. I mean, that is the beauty of our 
country, the diversity and the different stories. This is a 
very unique country.
    And we shouldn't lose the opportunity to really unite our 
students and have pride for their country by doing this. And I 
don't think it is mutually exclusive. You can share the rich 
history of others and the contributions of others while also 
sharing the pride and teaching the pride of our country and how 
we are united under one flag.
    So I reject the belief that by doing this we are dividing. 
In fact, I think those who think that don't really understand 
what happens in our classrooms and the roles of our educators 
to bring students from different cultures together, learning 
together. There is so much benefit to that. I think that 
experience is greater in many ways than the experience that 
they get from whatever content they have in front of them.
    So we recognize the opportunity we have as educators to 
bring our country together, and listen to our students, and 
give them an opportunity to share their voice. They are ready 
for it. Sometimes the adults take a little bit longer, but they 
are ready for it.
    Ms. Clark. Thank you so much.
    The Chair. Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
    And just to follow up on that, I appreciate you want people 
to know the rich history and contributions. In Baltimore, when 
they tear down a statute of Christopher Columbus, that doesn't 
contribute to sharing rich history and contributions.
    Now, the Department of Education made the front page of The 
Wall Street Journal last Friday with a story that I hope you 
are familiar with about the Courtney report on student loans.
    Of great concern, this is--we are the Appropriations 
Committee. And the focus of this article was that the Biden 
administration has outright rejected the Courtney report and 
will continue to falsify or to claim large profits on student 
loans or even small profits on the student loans portfolio, 
when in fact the Courtney report indicated that probably a 
third of the student loans will never be repaid.
    And this does bear on the ability, for instance, to 
refinance student loans, because if on paper refinance results 
in less profit that was never there to begin with, you might be 
less likely to refinance loans.
    So first off, the article says--claims--and I never believe 
anything that I read in the media on first blush--it says that 
Biden officials never saw Mr. Courtney's report.
    Mr. Secretary, did you see Mr. Courtney's report.
    Secretary Cardona. My staff is aware of the report, and I 
stand by the decision to make sure that----
    Mr. Harris. Did you see Mr. Courtney's report? And did any 
of your staff see Mr.--read Mr. Courtney's report, see it? 
Because the Wall Street Journal claims your staff didn't see 
it. They dismissed it out of hand as some Betsy DeVos scheme 
against student loans.
    Now, Mr. Courtney was in fact a very high-ranking 
individual in a very foremost financial services firm who ran 
the student loan portfolio. This is not someone with a 
political agenda. This is someone who made great success in the 
private finance sector.
    You stand by their decision having never seen the report. 
Is that your testimony today in front of this committee?
    Secretary Cardona. You know who else has a lot of 
credibility in this field?
    Mr. Harris. Mr. Secretary, excuse me. If you don't want to 
answer the question, just say, ``Look, I don't want to answer 
the question.''
    Are you standing by the Biden administration, Department of 
Education officials in their assessment, having never seen the 
report yourself?
    Secretary Cardona. I stand by the decision of my team to 
not validate a report that was developed without the same 
checks and balances that the report that we use.
    Mr. Harris. So you think that it is okay to dismiss it 
without actually reading it and seeing what it says? Because 
this involves hundreds of billions of dollars of potential 
student loan default that is on our budget contributing to our 
deficit.
    Mr. Secretary, I am disappointed that you would dismiss a 
report this serious. And, look, I understand you are smiling 
about it. This is nothing to smile out about. This is hundreds 
of billion dollars in student loans with the administration 
dismissing out of hand without the Secretary even having seen 
the report.
    I yield back.
    Secretary Cardona. I have confidence in my team, and I 
stand by the decisions we have made. Thank you.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And thank you for standing by 
what you believe is the right thing for our students. And we 
had enough of Betsy DeVos and her misguided policies for 4 
years.
    Let me just say that when I do the Pledge of Allegiance to 
the flag and I say one Nation under God, I feel something when 
I say that, because I believe it. And so, I am very much 
appreciative of the fact that you have mentioned that a number 
of times.
    I know that most recently there was a collaborative, a new 
collaborative that was created, and that there was a national 
convening for 2 days around educational issues, particularly 
relating to the pandemic learning loss.
    Secretary Cardona. The reopening summit? Is that what you 
are referring to?
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Well, I have it down here as the 
national convening of the collaborative, a 2-day discussion of 
leaders and stakeholders to design evidence-based programs to 
address the pandemic loss.
    Secretary Cardona. The Summer Learning Collaborative, yes.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Okay. I am really interested in 
knowing some of the outcomes, particularly as they relate to 
the impact of the pandemic learning loss on minority students 
and what we are proposing with regard to giving that the 
attention it needs.
    Secretary Cardona. Yes. Thank you for bringing that up.
    The Summer Learning Collaborative was really intended to 
make sure we take innovative ideas, best practices from across 
the country, share them with a focus on recovering from the 
pandemic in nontraditional ways. I often said I would love to 
have summer learning programs without one ditto. We need 
students to have hands-on experiences. So that is what that 
was.
    We are going to be releasing a report soon, probably next 
month, about the impacts of the pandemic on different students 
to make sure that when we reopen schools we are addressing 
those with energy and making sure that the resources that we 
have are aimed at that. We definitely will keep you in the loop 
and look forward to having more conversations with you.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. And particularly mental health 
services for Black youth in particular.
    Thank you very much.
    Let me just say that New Jersey has the reputation of 
having one of best school systems in the country, but we also 
have the most segregated school system--one of the most 
segregated school systems--and you will find the differential 
is very stark in what happens in those schools.
    And I am very much of a magnet school person. I have got 
lots of ideas, I have got lots of ideas. I think that the other 
schools should have been laboratories and that we should have 
learned from and been able to apply, not substitute for just 
plain old public schools.
    And I look forward to having discussions with you because 
this is a very important subject to me. And I thank you for 
being here.
    And Madam Chair, I yield back. And thank you for your 
indulgence.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you. I think that there are--Mrs. 
Lawrence, Congresswoman Lawrence? Congressman Harder? Okay.
    What I would now like to do is to yield to the ranking 
member for any closing comments. Oh, wait a minute.
    Congresswoman Lawrence, this is a 3-minute round. You are 
recognized.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Secretary, thank you for your time.
    I just want to just echo and show some bipartisanship here. 
I think in our commitment to developing a skilled workforce 
that we need to look at Pell Grants and other resources for 
those who choose not to go to a 4-year university, that we are 
giving them the resources to aid them in attending these 
certified community colleges programs.
    And, again, the point I wanted to make about the skilled 
workforce that we need for the mental health.
    When I dealt with Flint and we were trying to mitigate the 
lead poisoning in those children, the one thing they said they 
needed were social workers and mental health providers in the 
schools, because we knew that the lead poisoning would have an 
adverse impact on their development and they would act out in 
school.
    And we didn't need to put them in detention and expel them. 
We needed mental health trained professionals so that they 
could care for these children.
    The number one thing we heard was that there are not enough 
people going into social work or the mental health profession.
    And so in your role, how do we feed, support, and 
incentivize? We have Teach For America. We have programs for 
rural doctors. How do we grab hold to this?
    Because we are also dealing with this in policing. We need 
mental health professionals to address these psychotic 
situations instead of calling 911 to arrest somebody, beat 
them, and, unfortunately, sometimes kill them.
    So we have a crisis when it comes to the mental health 
workforce. And that was my second question.
    Thank you so much.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that.
    You are absolutely right, we need to be proactive. What we 
saw in Flint should serve as a lesson. We are coming out of a 
pandemic and the mental health needs of our students--and our 
staff, I would add--needs to be at the forefront, our social-
emotional well-being. So not only do we have to plan for it, 
but we have to make sure we have qualified staff.
    I think the community school model really helps that. How 
are we engaging with our community partners?
    I remember having experiences as an assistant 
superintendent with a community health center where we had a 
good partnership there and we had nonprofits or other agencies 
in the community. It takes a village, right? So how do we think 
outside of the box.
    That is why this investment in community schools is 
critically important, to get to those underlying issues. It is 
hard to learn, your academic bandwidth is diminished, if you 
are hungry, if you have housing instability.
    So we need to make sure we are thinking about the whole 
child and providing support and services. And you are 
absolutely right, we need to do more for mental health.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you so much.
    And I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Let me now yield to the ranking member, Congressman Cole, 
for any further comments or closing remarks that you would like 
to make.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank you 
very much for holding the hearing. As always, a great hearing.
    Mr. Secretary, it is really good to have you here and have 
an opportunity to get to know you a little bit better. I 
appreciate your testimony and I appreciate very much the spirit 
in which you approached the hearing.
    Let me go back and make a few points.
    We do, and I would be remiss not to point this out, have a 
fundamental disagreement overall with the President's budget in 
the sense that we think there is too little in defense, too 
much in domestic spending.
    Your Department is probably at the top of that list. The 41 
percent increase is pretty generous, to say the least, and we 
think there is going to have to be some adjustment there.
    And if we can't get there, then what I would fear as an 
appropriator is it will stumble into what is called a 
continuing resolution. You will be living with last year's 
budget. That is something that none of us on either side of the 
aisle want to do.
    But I also want to point out there are some areas of 
agreement and I want to applaud some of your efforts. I am 
particularly pleased with proposals like IDEA. There is no 
question we need to be doing more there. And, frankly, I think 
that gives local schools a lot of flexibility as to how they 
help students with special needs.
    I like the emphasis as well on the Pell Grant, that I know 
our chairwoman is also a big fan of. That, again, provides a 
lot of opportunity for other students.
    When I was chairman, and always with our current chairman's 
support, we were very big on TRIO and GEAR UP. We thought those 
are very important programs for first-generation college 
students to give them the chance to succeed.
    So there is a lot of common ground here, and we look 
forward to working with you in those areas.
    I would also tell you--and I am going to go back, as I did 
in the opening question--I am very concerned about the civics 
issue.
    I am very concerned about when I see a departmental Federal 
registry notice that sites The 1619 Project, controversial 
scholars, that these are going to be the criteria that we use.
    That is going to be a problem. And that is not to me 
allowing local people to set the curriculum. It is, quite 
frankly, Federal interference, and it is pushing a particular 
point of view.
    I am not going to drag you into history, but I would feel a 
lot better if I saw Joseph Ellis and Ron Chernow and those kind 
of people cited. Although I would tell you, you are citing a 
grant, you probably should never mention a specific type of 
individual, because every historian will have a point of view. 
That is not what we are trying to do here in this.
    So, again, I welcome a continued dialogue with you about 
that important issue.
    I appreciate too you seem to agree with a number of our 
colleagues that we need in-person learning. I mean, again, I 
think the medical evidence is absolutely clear on this. It was 
clear a long time ago.
    I think the hearings we have had show some of the social 
consequences of not having kids in school. Everything from drug 
addiction, to isolation, to mental health problems suggest how 
important that is.
    And I know from talking to my own son, he is a classroom 
teacher, how concerned he was that kids weren't in classrooms, 
where you had a lot of teachers there that cared about kids 
that were in a position to check on them, provide structure in 
their life. Some of these kids, that is the place where they 
get structure and get protection.
    So getting them unhooked as much as possible from virtual 
learning and back where they are in a more traditional 
classroom setting is a goal I think we all share and I hope we 
can work together.
    I don't mean we lose the tools. We all know technology can 
be a marvelous tool and is something we need. But I think, 
again, the evidence is clear, school age children need to be in 
school and we need to be using the leverage we have to 
encourage people to do that as much as possible. And from your 
testimony, I think that you have that same kind of view.
    Let me just, again, end with this. I want to thank the 
chairwoman again for the hearing. I know how passionate she is 
on these issues, and I think rightfully so.
    I think we live in a society where education is the key to 
upward mobility. We want to give every child that opportunity, 
regardless of the circumstances in which they come into the 
world. We know they don't all come in on equal footing, and 
some folks need more help than others and some communities have 
been left behind. So you will find no disagreement there. We 
just simply want to work with you on the tools that we think 
are effective.
    We will go back to my favorites, TRIO and GEAR UP, just to 
say sometimes old tools are good tools. I have watched multiple 
administrations, they always want to do something new. And that 
is good, we need to be pressing on.
    But we need to remember sometimes, when we have got 
something that works, and it has worked for 50 years, and I 
will point to TRIO, produced 5 million college graduates for 
this country, I wonder how many of those kids that went through 
TRIO would have graduated from college absent that program or 
would it even have been there in the first place.
    And I would say that is a good program. That is a program 
that has produced for the American people and it has given 
millions of our fellow Americans opportunities that their 
parents and grandparents never, ever had.
    So, again, we look forward to working with you to find 
common ground. I always look forward to working with my friend, 
the chairman. And thank you again.
    And, believe me, I am counting the days when we can sit 
down in person and have these kind of discussions at length, 
because I value your personal experience. I think it is a model 
of the American Dream in action.
    I appreciate your commitment to educating children, every 
child, providing opportunity. You don't only say those things, 
it is your experience over a lifetime. And my good friend the 
chairman's high praise for you tells me that that is true, that 
the values that you profess are the values you live by and the 
values you have made your career by.
    So, again, look forward to having the opportunity to work 
with you.
    And thank you, Madam Chair, for holding the hearing. I 
yield back.
    Secretary Cardona. Thank you, sir. I appreciate that.
    The Chair. I thank the ranking member for his comments and 
would just reiterate--and I am thankful for the partnership 
that we do have on the Civics Secures Democracy Act. And it 
specifically prohibits any use of the funds for a national 
curriculum in American history or even in civics education.
    So I am hopeful that we can continue to pursue that. I 
think civics education is something that is really critical for 
the people in this country. I think it helps to really 
strengthen our democracy in so many ways that we need to think 
about for the future.
    And I would just a brief personal anecdote.
    My father arrived in the United States at age 13 as an 
immigrant from Italy, and they put him in the seventh grade in 
the city of New Haven, and he was asked to define the word 
``janitor'' in one of the classes.
    And he didn't speak the language or neither read or write 
the language, and he didn't know what the word ``janitor'' 
meant. But he drew on his Italian heritage and he focused on 
the word ``genitori.'' And genitori means parents, and that is 
the way he described the word ``janitor.''
    And at that moment, his teachers and his classmates laughed 
at him.
    My father left school in the seventh grade, which was the 
end of a formal education, because of that kind of humiliation.
    He went on to serve his country in the military, served on 
the city council in the city of New Haven, and moved on with a 
wonderful career in our community and our city.
    But those days of when we do not recognize the strengths of 
those who come from different places, different lands, 
different experiences, and our need to embrace them is critical 
in terms of our children and moving forward in education.
    And I want to say a thank you to you, Secretary Cardona, 
for your commitment to our children, our students, all ages, 
races, sexes, backgrounds, and utilizing, as the ranking member 
said, what education is. And my parents spent a lifetime making 
sure I had the best of the academic experiences. Who could 
foretell that I would wind up where I am today?
    But it is the great equalizer, education. Education for 
families today is the way that they believe that their children 
will be able to succeed for the future, and recognizing that it 
is our children's God-given talent that promotes them, and 
whatever the old tools--or the new tools--that we want to 
utilize to be able to have them realize their dreams and 
aspirations, which is what our education should be about.
    And I want to say a thank you to you, Mr. Secretary. The 
budget does place strong funding increases for Title I, special 
education, Pell Grants, higher education, community schools--
let's bring them back--and so many other areas, universal 
preschool for 3 and 4-year-olds, free community college, 
teacher development, to be more prepared to teach our 
youngsters.
    And as we reflect on what we do as appropriators, we look 
to a budget that, in fact, invests in students and teachers, 
public schools, higher education, career technical education. 
And we want to make sure, yes, that the funds are utilized in 
the manner that has been set forth.
    So above all, it is about making sure that average citizens 
today have a better chance at a better life and that American 
Dream becomes a reality.
    I will just close with this. It also says that poverty is 
unacceptable. And poverty is, in some of our districts and some 
of our communities, is the biggest roadblock to youngsters 
being able to get a good education, with good schools, with 
good teachers, with good curricula, and a direction for them 
for the future.
    And we do have the capacity to help to abolish poverty so 
that kids can get an equal opportunity for the future.
    Mr. Secretary, thank you so much for your testimony today.
    And with that, I will bang my hand on the table here, and 
this hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
    And thank my colleagues very, very much for their interest 
and their questions this morning. Thank you.
    [Questions and answers submitted for the record follow:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

                                            Thursday, May 13, 2021.

  MENTAL HEALTH EMERGENCIES: BUILDING A ROBUST CRISIS RESPONSE SYSTEM

                               WITNESSES

CHARLES DIKE, MEDICAL DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER, CONNECTICUT 
    DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION SERVICES
ROBERT GEBBIA, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE 
    PREVENTION
TONJA MYLES, CERTIFIED PEER SUPPORT SPECIALIST, COMMUNITY LIAISON, THE 
    BRIDGE CENTER FOR HOPE, RI INTERNATIONAL
CHRIS RICHARDSON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES, 
    MENTAL HEALTH CENTER OF DENVER
STEVEN CASSTEVENS, IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION 
    OF CHIEFS OF POLICE
    The Chair. This hearing will come to order.
    As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few 
housekeeping matters. For today's meeting, the chair or staff 
designated by the chair may mute participants' microphones when 
they are not under recognition for the purposes of eliminating 
inadvertent background noise.
    Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves. 
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask if 
you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate 
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
    I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock 
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to 
the next member until the issue is resolved, and you will 
retain the balance of your time.
    You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how 
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will 
turn yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the 
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When 
your time has expired, the clock will turn red, and I will 
begin to recognize the next member.
    In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the 
chair and ranking member. Then members present at the time the 
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of 
seniority and, finally, members not present at the time the 
hearing is called to order.
    Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have 
set up an email address to which members can send anything they 
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups. 
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
    And with that, I want to acknowledge Ranking Member Cole 
and all of our colleagues for joining this morning. You all 
should have received a memo with data on mental health and law 
enforcement with extensive background for this hearing, which I 
would like to say a thank you to Congresswoman Lawrence and 
Congressman Harder for suggesting this hearing in February. If 
you did not receive the memo, please let staff know, and we 
will get you a copy.
    Let me also extend a warm welcome to today's witnesses--Dr. 
Dike, Mr. Gebbia, Ms. Myles, Mr. Richardson, and Chief 
Casstevens. We thank you for being here, especially now as we 
mark May as Mental Health Awareness Month, and we look forward 
to your testimony. I will further introduce the witnesses in a 
few minutes.
    Over the past few years and all across our country, we have 
seen far too many instances in which local police have had to 
deal with individuals suffering from mental health crises or 
behavioral issues when what these individuals really need is 
medical treatment or a mental health provider. But due to a 
lack of mental health resources or teams better equipped to 
handle these situations, police are often the first and the 
only services to arrive at the scene.
    But there is something that we can do about it. Recently, 
the City of New Haven announced a new program, which is the 
focus of one of my community project requests this year. This 
program, the New Haven Community Crisis Response Team, would 
divert 911 calls involving someone experiencing mental health 
crisis or a behavioral issue to Social Services and to dispatch 
specially trained social worker-led teams to address calls 
related to homelessness, mental health, and substance abuse 
disorder instead of police.
    This program will significantly reduce the need for the New 
Haven Police Department and EMS responses to incidences that 
are not of criminal or health emergency nature. And we are 
seeing more models like this around the country, which we will 
talk about today.
    The issue of mental health and substance use was already a 
growing concern in this country before the COVID-19 pandemic. 
The isolation, the school closures, the economic anxiety, job 
losses, and challenges for obtaining childcare or paid time off 
have only exacerbated these already-existing problems and 
created new barriers to treatment.
    According to the American Psychiatric Association, people 
from racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive 
mental healthcare even without the additional barriers posed by 
the pandemic. For example, in 2015, among adults with mental 
illness, 48 percent of whites received mental health services, 
compared with 31 percent of blacks and Hispanics and 22 percent 
of Asians.
    Earlier this year, we had a hearing of this subcommittee on 
these growing problems, and today, we are looking at how we can 
strengthen the mental health crisis response system so that 
mental health providers across the country can respond to 
mental health emergencies rather than law enforcement.
    Mental illnesses are serious medical conditions, and 
without treatment, these conditions can result in a diminished 
capacity for coping with the ordinary demands of life. 
Untreated mental illness can escalate to a crisis situation 
where a family member, friend, or someone in the community 
feels they have no choice but to call 911, which inevitably 
leads to situations in which law enforcement are responding to 
what is actually a mental health emergency.
    Meanwhile, for the individual, arrest can cause unnecessary 
trauma, which can make their long-term recovery more difficult. 
This can lead to high rates of incarceration or even more 
tragic outcomes, including needless death, particularly for 
black or brown people.
    I have just been handed a note that there is an audio issue 
with livestream. Is that accurate?
    Voice. Yes, Chair, the livestream isn't getting any audio 
right now. The CO chief is asking that we briefly recess.
    [Recess.]
    The Chair. Over the past few years and all across our 
country, we have seen far too many instances in which local 
police have had to deal with individuals suffering from mental 
health crises or behavioral issues when what these individuals 
really need is medical treatment or a mental health provider. 
But due to a lack of mental health resources or teams better 
equipped to handle these situations, police are often the first 
and the only services to arrive at the scene.
    But there is something that we can do about it. Recently, 
the City of New Haven announced a new program, which is the 
focus of one of my community project requests this year. This 
program, the New Haven Community Crisis Response Team, would 
divert 911 calls involving someone experiencing mental health 
crisis or a behavioral issue to Social Services and dispatch 
specially trained social worker-led teams to address calls 
related to homelessness, mental health, and substance abuse 
disorder instead of police.
    This program will significantly reduce the need for the New 
Haven Police Department and EMS responses to incidences that 
are not of criminal or health emergency nature. And we are 
seeing more models like this around the country, which we will 
speak about today.
    The issue of mental health and substance abuse was already 
a growing concern in this country before the COVID-19 pandemic, 
but the isolation, the school closures, the economic anxiety, 
job losses, and challenges for obtaining childcare or paid time 
off have only exacerbated these already-existing problems and 
created new barriers to treatment.
    According to the American Psychiatric Association, people 
from racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive 
mental healthcare even without the additional barriers posed by 
the pandemic. For example, in 2015, among adults with any 
mental illness, 48 percent of whites received mental health 
services, compared with 31 percent of blacks and Hispanics and 
22 percent of Asians.
    Earlier this year, we had a hearing of this subcommittee on 
these growing problems, and today, we are looking at how we can 
strengthen the mental health crisis response system so that 
mental health providers across this country can respond to 
mental health emergencies rather than law enforcement.
    Mental illnesses are serious medical conditions, and 
without treatment, these conditions can result in a diminished 
capacity for coping with the ordinary demands of life. 
Untreated mental illness can escalate to a crisis situation 
where a family member, friend, or someone in the community 
feels they have no choice but to call 911, which inevitably 
leads to situations in which law enforcement are responding to 
what is actually a mental health emergency.
    Meanwhile, for the individual, arrest can cause unnecessary 
trauma, which can make their long-term recovery more difficult. 
This can lead to high rates of incarceration or even more 
tragic outcomes, including needless death, particularly for 
black or brown people.
    According to the Treatment Advocacy Center, 1 in 10 police 
responses involves an individual with a mental health 
condition, 1 in 5 incarcerated individuals lives with a mental 
health condition, and 1 in 4 individuals killed by police had a 
mental health condition, which is especially tragic because 
police--most police want to do their jobs well. They just do 
not always have the tools or training necessary to respond to a 
mental health emergency.
    Part of the problem here is that the behavioral health 
system has been underfunded for years. We need to make 
treatment more available to everyone who needs it and ensure 
crisis services are available to anyone. In recent years, we 
have made efforts to address this shortfall. We have made 
serious investments in our police departments and our crisis 
intervention programs, and we will continue to do so.
    The Affordable Care Act significantly expanded access to 
Medicaid, which in many States is the most important source of 
coverage and funding for behavioral health services. And the 
American Rescue Plan gave an additional financial incentive to 
expand Medicaid for the 14 States that have not yet done so and 
allows States to use Medicaid funds to support the expansion of 
mental health mobile crisis teams.
    In addition, last year we increased our overall funding for 
the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 
by $133,000,000, for a total of $6,000,000,000. In this 
committee, we also increased funding for mental health services 
block grants by $35,000,000. We created a 5 percent set-aside 
within the block grant specifically focused on crisis services. 
And over the past year, in 3 separate emergency bills, we have 
provided more than $8,600,000,000 to a variety of programs to 
address the mental health impacts of the pandemic.
    Meanwhile, President Biden's fiscal year 2022 budget 
blueprint would double funding of the mental health services 
block grant to $1,600,000,000, an increase of $825,000,000. And 
while we have not seen the full budget yet, according to the 
administration's blueprint, it is clear they are proposing 
additional funding for partnerships between mental health 
providers and law enforcement, as well as suicide prevention 
activities. Similarly, SAMHSA has put out a roadmap for robust 
crisis care services that can divert people experiencing a 
mental health crisis from the criminal justice system into 
mental health treatment.
    Another important tool is going to be the rollout in July 
of 2022 of 988 as the new 3-digit number for the National 
Suicide Prevention Lifeline. It is a dedicated number for 
people experiencing a mental health crisis to call and access 
lifesaving resources.
    Many communities are implementing model programs where 
mental health providers respond to mental health emergencies, 
ensuring that you have individuals with healthcare training are 
dispatched to address these situations and freeing up police 
resources to where they are most needed.
    There are a range of different approaches that communities 
can take, different levels of police involvement, or no police 
involvement, depending on the mental health resources available 
in the community. So I am greatly encouraged to see how many 
other members have submitted requests across the Labor, HHS and 
the CJS Subcommittees for crisis intervention projects, 
including crisis response teams, mental health co-responders, 
and 911 diversion projects.
    Crisis intervention team programs create the connections 
between law enforcement, mental health providers, hospital 
emergency services, and individuals with mental illness and 
their families. These models have something in common. They 
bring all the different stakeholders together--mental health 
providers, hospitals, law enforcement, people with mental 
illness and their families, and we need to engage everyone.
    If someone's illness has escalated to a point of crisis, 
the system has already failed them. How we respond to that 
crisis can be a turning point in someone's life. It can lead to 
lifesaving treatment, but if we fail, unnecessary incarceration 
or even more tragic, irreversible outcomes.
    I am looking forward to hearing from our witnesses about 
what we can do to expand access to the mental health crisis 
services, different models around the country, how we can 
encourage more communities to think about changing the way they 
respond to mental health emergencies.
    Now let me turn to the ranking member of the committee, 
Congressman Cole, for any opening remarks that he may have.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    And I want to thank the chair for holding another important 
hearing today.
    The purview of this subcommittee is broad. However, it is 
fair to say, historically, we have probably paid more attention 
to physical health than we have to mental health. The past few 
years, we have seen a notable realignment to focusing on a 
wider range of issues in terms of mental health, particularly 
mental well-being, problems with substance abuse, the 
importance of social and emotional learning, and the value of 
development from the earliest stages of life. I think this 
broad perspective has permitted us to view the pandemic in a 
way not possible with the flu pandemic of the early 1900s.
    Now, as we are still battling the physical toll on our 
communities and families, we are also addressing the other 
impacts, such as the impact on mental health. This focus on the 
whole person isn't just happening in schools and health 
clinics. It is a trend also shaping how law enforcement 
responds to calls for assistance.
    The United States averages over 240 million calls to 911 a 
year, a staggering 600,000 calls a day. These calls run the 
gamut from extreme emergencies and life-threatening situations 
to more mundane matters. Just under 700,000 police officers 
stand ready to respond to these calls. These men and women must 
be prepared to address the entire spectrum of calls for help 
each day they go to work.
    Now of the countless responsibilities of law enforcement, 
today we are here to focus on their work with people 
experiencing a mental health crisis. Three out of 100 people 
will experience psychosis at some time in their lives. About 
100,000 adolescents and young adults in the United States 
experience----
    The Chair. Excuse me for interrupting, Congressman Cole. I 
have just been alerted that there is another issue with the 
livestream, and I would like to have your comments be heard by 
everyone. So if you don't mind pausing, we will pause for the 
moment and recess until this is corrected.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Cole. Absolutely. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    [Recess.]
    Mr. Cole. Okay, Madam Chair, I am going to pick up where I 
left off, if that is all right?
    The Chair. Okay, that is fine. That is fine.
    Mr. Cole. Okay, thank you very much.
    Three out of 100 people experience psychosis at some time 
in their lives. About 100,000 adolescents and young adults in 
the United States experience their first episode of psychosis 
each year. In addition to serious mental illness, approximately 
50,000 people will commit suicide per year, not including 
suicide attempts.
    Individuals experiencing mental health issues present 
unique challenges for law enforcement. Recognizing this need, 
police have identified a need for training to de-escalate a 
crisis involving someone experiencing a mental health issue. 
Building on the training, several police departments have 
established teams, responding units that pair law enforcement 
with a behavioral health or other mental health professional to 
assist in the response.
    Today, we are here to learn about some of the models used 
to address the interconnectedness of law enforcement and 
someone experiencing a mental health crisis. As is so often the 
case, States have been the pioneers, exploring different 
options to address the situation. Several States have launched 
co-responder models, which pair law enforcement with mental 
health professionals to respond to some of the calls in 
question.
    Many of these programs are new. Program data on 
scalability, effectiveness, and applicability to different 
communities and situations is limited and will take time to 
become more widely available and understood.
    We also have the limitations in quality substance use 
disorder treatment programs, and most areas experience a 
shortage----
    The Chair. Congressman Cole.
    Mr. Cole. Yes, ma'am?
    The Chair. I am going to interrupt you one more time 
because we are experiencing the difficulty, and I do want to 
have your comments heard.
    Mr. Cole. You are more generous than some of my colleagues. 
[Laughter.]
    Mr. Cole. They might be happy to dispense with them.
    [Recess.]
    The Chair. I understand we are good to go here, and let me 
just apologize to our witnesses and also to my colleagues for 
your patience. But Congressman Cole, I just ask you to resume 
and, again, my apologies.
    Mr. Cole. Oh, Madam Chair, it is certainly not your fault. 
Why don't we do this, Madam Chair? I will just submit my 
statement for the record.
    I know we need time for our witnesses and certainly time 
for our members to ask questions. So I will forego the rest of 
my statement, submit it for the record, and we can move 
straight to the witnesses.
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very, very much.
    Let me introduce our witnesses. Dr. Charles Dike, Associate 
Professor of Psychiatry at Yale University, and excited to have 
you here, Dr. Dike, and speaking about the Connecticut 
experience. And thank you for being with us.
    Robert Gebbia, Chief Executive Officer, American Foundation 
for Suicide Prevention.
    Tonja Myles, certified peer support specialist.
    Chris Richardson, Associate Director of Criminal Justice 
Services at the Mental Health Center of Denver.
    Chief Steven Casstevens, Third Vice President, 
International Association of Chiefs of Police.
    Our first witness is Dr. Charles Dike. Your full written 
testimony will be included in the record, and you are now 
recognized for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
    Thank you, Dr. Dike.
    Dr. Dike. Good morning, Chair DeLauro, Ranking Member Cole, 
members of the subcommittee.
    My name is Charles--Dr. Charles Dike. I am Associate 
Professor of Psychiatry at Yale University School of Medicine, 
and I am also medical director at Connecticut Department of 
Mental Health and Addiction Services and chair of the Ethics 
Committee of the American Psychiatric Association, the APA. 
Thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the APA 
today.
    I would like to begin by thanking you, Chair DeLauro and 
Ranking Member Cole, as well as Representative Bustos and all 
subcommittee members who supported creation of the 5 percent 
set-aside for crisis services in the community mental health 
services block grant beginning in fiscal year 2021.
    As you know, mental health conditions and substance use 
disorders do not discriminate based on age, sex, race, 
political party, or where patients reside. As Congress, States, 
our local governments work together to implement 988 by July 
2022, it is essential that Congress supports community 
infrastructure for responding to 988 calls, like EMS, police, 
and fire response infrastructure that supports the 911.
    As medical director of Connecticut DMHAS, I work to 
coordinate delivery of quality evidence-based care at all 
levels across our system. Communities in Connecticut and across 
the country do their best to patch together various types and 
levels of mental health response with insufficient resources. 
This patchwork typically relies too much on emergency rooms and 
police departments and can result in patients languishing in 
emergency rooms, criminalization of persons with mental health 
and substance use disorders, and at times, the unnecessary and 
tragic loss of life.
    Success in the future depends on strengthening and funding 
the mental health infrastructure by choosing evidence-based 
community crisis systems as essential community services 
necessary for 988 implementation. The ideal system provides a 
person in crisis someone to talk to, someone to respond, and a 
place to go.
    Crisis call centers provide someone to talk to and should 
be regional 24/7 clinically staffed hubs providing intervention 
capabilities through telephone, text, and chat. Mobile crisis 
teams provide someone to respond and should be available to 
reach any person experiencing crisis throughout a defined 
service area in his or her home, workplace, or any other 
community-based location in a timely manner.
    There are three basic types of mobile response. First, 
where police are the primary responders. Second, where a mental 
health professional accompanies police. And third, where 
behavioral health mobile crisis teams respond with or without 
police.
    Crisis receiving and stabilization facilities provide 
places to go to, to receive appropriate care. They provide 
short-term, under 24 hours observation and crisis stabilization 
services to all referrals in a home-like, nonhospital 
environment. But longer-term services beyond 24 hours can 
sometimes be necessary. The most effective system includes a 
``no wrong door'' approach, where receiving facilities can 
quickly take in individuals in crisis so they do not encumber 
police resources or end up in jail or emergency rooms 
unnecessarily.
    Communities with a full continuum of crisis care services, 
including partnership with CIT-trained police, see the best 
results. For example, Maricopa County, Arizona's crisis line 
resolves 90 percent of its 20,000 monthly calls by phone 
without law enforcement involvement.
    In my home State of Connecticut, 116 law enforcement 
agencies, including police departments and others, have CIT-
trained officers, and 43 police departments have established a 
CIT policy. But we have much more to do in our State and across 
the country. We are grateful for your attention to mental 
health matters.
    Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you so much. And thank you for coming in 
under the 5 minutes. That is helpful.
    Our next witness is Robert Gebbia. Your full testimony will 
be included in the record. You are now recognized for 5 minutes 
for your opening statement.
    Mr. Gebbia. Thank you, Chairman DeLauro and Ranking Member 
Cole, members of the committee, for this opportunity to testify 
today on behalf of this important topic of crisis response.
    I am here today on behalf of millions of Americans who have 
lost loved ones to suicide, the 1 in 4 Americans who have a 
diagnosable mental health condition every year, 10 million 
Americans living with serious thoughts of suicide, and more 
than 1 million who attempt suicide annually.
    Suicide is a leading cause of death in our country, but 
with investments in prevention and access to treatment, many 
suicides can be prevented. Yet only half of Americans with a 
mental health condition, such as depression, anxiety, substance 
use, and other risk factors for suicide are receiving care. 
This leads to the question, how can we ensure that people in 
crisis are connected to care?
    I am here to speak about a crisis response system that is 
better able to mitigate suicidal and mental health crises. 
While we recognize great strides have been made by the country 
and by Congress to support mental health needs of the Nation, 
more needs to be done in how we address people in emotional 
distress.
    As a result of the landmark hotline designation, that 988 
will be live nationwide by July of 2022. This offers a unique 
opportunity to rethink and reimagine mental health crisis 
response. It is an opportunity we must not ignore.
    SAMHSA has recognized that crisis call centers and 
hotlines, mobile crisis intervention teams, and stabilization 
services are at the core of an effective crisis response 
system. This describes the system we must invest in creating 
for all Americans. What might that look like?
    Well, first, 988 will connect callers to the National 
Suicide Prevention Lifeline, which consists of a network of 
over 180 local and State-funded crisis centers across the U.S. 
Counselors at these centers answer millions of calls and chats 
from people in distress coming through the lifeline every year. 
So, first, we recognize the lifeline is a key component of 
crisis response, and it will need increased funding to meet the 
anticipated increase in call volume when 988 is promoted and 
available nationwide.
    Second, local crisis center infrastructure must be 
strengthened or calls will go unanswered, wait times will 
increase, and people won't receive the help they need. Local 
centers must be adequately staffed, and training needs to be 
provided so that we have quality culturally competent care 
everywhere.
    It is important to point out that of the millions of calls 
to the lifeline each year, 98 percent of the crises are 
successfully de-escalated over the phone, which brings me to my 
third point. What happens when additional intervention and 
support is necessary and a crisis must be responded to in 
person, whether through 988 or 911?
    Well, too many communities do not have the capacity to 
respond. Too often law enforcement personnel are the only ones 
available and aren't trained to respond to these types of 
emergencies. Members of law enforcement do not serve as 
treatment providers for any other illness, and yet they are the 
de facto responders for mental health crises, with 21 percent 
of law enforcement staff time and 10 percent of law enforcement 
budget spent on responding to and transporting persons with 
mental illness.
    And what does that lead to? Individuals in distress or who 
are suicidal often wait in emergency rooms or jails sometimes 
for hours or days without any mental healthcare. And when 
released, they also lose contact with the healthcare system and 
resurface again during the next crisis. Other individuals are 
admitted to psychiatric hospitals, often multiple times, for 
expensive care they may not need.
    Fortunately, there are models in Oregon and elsewhere that 
are providing mobile crisis interventions with mental health 
personnel that rarely require police involvement. We must 
invest in a comprehensive crisis response system that includes 
a continuum of care that can send mobile crisis outreach when 
needed, provide follow-up for callers, divert from current 
efforts that do not ensure safety, or treat underlying mental 
health conditions or suicidality.
    A report from the National Association of State Mental 
Health Directors and SAMHSA found that by enhancing crisis 
response, lives can be saved with the services that reduce 
suicide and opioid-related deaths and divert individuals from 
incarceration or unnecessary hospitalization and accurately 
assess, stabilize, and refer individuals with mental health 
challenges.
    Soon the committee will receive a report from SAMHSA and 
the Veterans Health Administration detailing the funding needed 
to make 988 and crisis response more effective. We urge you to 
make the financial investments they recommend and to use the 
launch of 988 as an opportunity to reimagine crisis response. 
It will save lives.
    Thank you.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you.
    And our next witness is Tonja Myles. And Ms. Myles, your 
full written testimony will be included in the record, and you 
are recognized for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
    Ms. Myles. Good morning, Chairman DeLauro, Ranking Member 
Cole, and members of the committee.
    I am Tonja Myles, peer support specialist, veteran, 
ordained minister, mental health and substance abuse 
consultant, wife, and community liaison for RI International, 
Bridge Center for Hope, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
    RI International is a nonprofit mental health practice 
provider based in Arizona with 9--in 9 States, including Baton 
Rouge. We are one of the primary authors of the Crisis Now 
model, the National Guidelines for Behavioral Health Best 
Practice Toolkit by SAMHSA, and active in the work to implement 
988 and the required crisis continuum of care across the 
Nation.
    I have been in recovery for over 35 years and was properly 
diagnosed with PTSD 5 years ago. I am a three-time suicide 
attempt survivor. For over 28 years, I have been blessed to 
wake up every day on a mission to push hope for those who 
suffer from addiction, mental illness, individuals incarcerated 
and formerly incarcerated.
    I also work with individuals and their families who find 
themselves in crisis for a number of reasons. I help them 
navigate the behavioral health system to ensure that they 
receive the best quality of treatment and available resources.
    I am a dedicated advocate for appropriate and effective 
mental health and crisis care for communities of color, to 
ensure that health systems and policymakers put in place better 
systems, which will eliminate disparities in access to adequate 
treatment and services. Throughout my career and calling, I 
have worked with some of the best organizations nationally and 
locally, such as Louisiana Office of Behavioral Health, NAMI 
Louisiana, Office of Mayor-President Sharon Weston Broome, 
Mental Health Advisory Council, and Equal Justice USA, just to 
name a few.
    In my hometown of Baton Rouge, I work with law enforcement 
as a part of their CIT training, a first responder model of 
police-based crisis intervention training. I share lived 
experience so that they can see mental illness does not 
discriminate, and it can happen to anyone.
    I am the primary caregiver to my uncle, who is 76 years 
old. He has schizophrenia, bipolar, and HIV. He lives in a 
group home, and he has been in group homes for over 50 years. 
Since there is no continuum of care available for the elderly 
with serious mental illness, in 2019 I had to have a PEC 10 
times. Each time involved 911 and law enforcement.
    Five years ago, I became the crisis. During a challenging 
time in my marriage of 27 years, my husband and I separated, 
and I felt like a failure. I felt hopeless, alone, and felt 
like my life was over. I felt so ashamed because my husband and 
I are leaders in the community, and people seemed to look at us 
and think that we have a picture-perfect life.
    One dark night, I wrote a four-page letter saying good-bye 
to my family and friends. I wanted them to know that this was 
my decision, and I was tired. I was tired of fighting for 
others while I was the one who was wounded from all the past 
trauma, years of trauma.
    I took my pills, got in my car to find a place where I 
could die in peace, easily be found, and be laid quickly to 
rest. I called my cousin to let him know--to let my family know 
that they had nothing to do with this. This was all my doing 
because I spent most of my life living to die.
    I hung up the phone, and 5 minutes later, the phone began 
to ring off the hook. Before I got ready to turn it off, a 
friend of mine called. I decided to pick up the phone, and my 
mind became a little clearer. She asked me to come to her 
house, and I told her I didn't, but I would go back to the 
house that I was staying and get some clothes and come over. I 
asked her not to call the police.
    As I turned the corner, I saw the police in the street, 
along with my nephew, Trei, who spotted my car, so I couldn't 
turn around and flee the scene. I knew I could talk my way out 
of this. I could drop some names because I had walked so many 
families through this process.
    When I got out of my car, I began to address the officer. 
He was nice and professional, and the dialogue was well. I even 
asked him if he was CIT trained, and he said yes.
    Then I began to name drop and told him I was just having a 
bad day. He said, ``Look, Tonja, I need to make sure you are 
okay.'' Then his supervisor came. When he came on the scene, he 
began to get rude and treated me with disrespect.
    For some reason, he treated me like a criminal and not 
someone with a crisis. For a brief moment, I felt myself 
getting angry, and I said, you know what, I could provoke him 
now. And what a way to die today, death by suicide, death by 
suicide with a cop.
    I looked over to see my nephew standing there, and I didn't 
want to see--him see me being shot down in the street. The 
other police officer got my attention. He seen I was 
struggling, and he de-escalated it. I was able to go to the 
hospital, where I stayed for 7 days.
    I can proudly say I haven't had a suicide attempt for the 
last 5 years. That is because I am going to treatment. My 
family knows where I am when it comes to my mental health 
crisis, and I have a continuum of care.
    There is a lot of people like me who don't have that, and 
we have to change that. And I believe we can. We have to make a 
difference so we can change lives.
    Thank you.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you so much, Tonja, for your powerful 
testimony this morning.
    Our next witness is Chris Richardson. And again, your full 
testimony will be included in the record, and you are 
recognized now for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
    Mr. Richardson. Thank you, Chairwoman DeLauro. It is a true 
honor and privilege to be here with you today.
    My name is Chris Richardson, and I currently serve as the 
Associate Director of Criminal Justice Services at the Mental 
Health Center of Denver, a nonprofit community mental health 
provider known nationally as a model of innovative care. We 
proudly serve the City and County of Denver and support the 
communities in their wellness and recovery.
    In my role, I oversee multiple programs that focus on the 
intersection of mental health and criminal justice. Today, I 
would like to talk with you about one of our programs at the 
forefront of innovation in mental health crisis response. STAR, 
or Support Team Assisted Response, serves as an alternative to 
low-risk, low-acuity 911 calls, many of which are related to 
substance use and mental health concerns.
    Launched June 1, 2020, the STAR pilot is a partnership 
between the Mental Health Center of Denver, Denver Health--one 
of Colorado's premier healthcare institutions--Denver Police 
Department, Denver Department of Public Health and Environment, 
as well as community stakeholders like Servicio De Laraza, Harm 
Reduction Action Center, Denver Justice Project, DASHR, and 
Caring4Denver.
    The intent of STAR is to send the right response, not a 
``one size fits all'' response, to people in crisis. People 
call 911 for an array of reasons, and it is not always 
something that presents with a legal nexus. Previously, 911 
calls were handled by police, fire, emergency medical response 
services. Denver took steps to look at how to best meet the 
needs of the community and added the STAR program to the 
emergency response system.
    Here is how it works. Dressed in street clothes, we provide 
direct clinical de-escalation, community service connections, 
as well as on-demand resources such as water, food, clothing, 
and basic living supports. Our team helps the emergency 
response system handle the overwhelming number of 911 calls 
that don't require a police response.
    When STAR pulls up, the individual can be assured that the 
interaction is grounded in a harm reduction, trauma-informed 
philosophy with people able to creatively meet whatever need 
they are presenting to maximize long-term support. If the STAR 
program can handle someone in crisis that frees up police to 
handle a robbery or domestic violence call, then that is an 
incredible success. We are seeing true results, a paradigm 
shift in results.
    Over the past 11 months, STAR has successfully responded to 
1,323 calls. Of those, there has not been a single arrest, no 
injury, and no need for police back-up. I want to repeat that. 
Not a single one of these calls resulted in the need for police 
response.
    The STAR team has the knowledge of social programs and 
resources to more easily help people in crisis and connect them 
to care. While not all calls have a diagnosable mental health 
condition, many individuals identify as experiencing symptoms 
of schizophrenia, bipolar, anxiety, and major depression that 
benefit from clinical intervention and community resourcing to 
best meet their immediate needs.
    STAR works in cooperation and coordination with Denver 
Police and other first responders. Like any collaboration, if 
we need the police on the scene, we trust they will be there to 
support our efforts and the safety of the community, much like 
we would be supporting them should they require STAR 
assistance. They keep an eye out for us, and we rely on one 
another's expertise to serve the community.
    In closing, I would like to share a call that we ran last 
week to demonstrate the need for growth of these programs and 
how through coordination, collaboration, and trust, we can 
better meet and support community needs.
    My colleague Carleigh Sailon responded to a STAR call at 
the request of Denver Police to a 7-Eleven store where a woman 
was experiencing mental health symptoms and actively refusing 
to leave the establishment. 7-Eleven asked that she be 
classified as a trespasser, but the Denver Police Department 
recognized that this was a mental health situation and not 
criminal in nature.
    STAR was requested on scene and was quickly able to build 
rapport with this woman. After a short time, she agreed to 
leave the store and asked to be transported to the local 
women's day shelter that frequently partners with STAR. During 
the transport, the woman asked for assistance activating her 
benefit card. The STAR team provided brief case management and 
activated the card so she could purchase food and other basic 
need items, which turned out to be the root cause of her issues 
with the 911 interaction.
    The woman was connected to the day shelter where she could 
rest, shower, and do her laundry, and services were set up with 
housing support established prior to us leaving. Additionally, 
case managers were tagged in and followed up with her the next 
morning, bringing her into mental health treatment to build on 
her recovery and support her in her goals moving forward.
    Through creative thinking, Denver has taken the next step 
in supporting the community. It has been an honor to share the 
details of how we are using this innovation to move the meter 
on mental health crisis response in Denver.
    Thank you for your time.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you very, very much.
    And now let me recognize our next witness, Chief Steven 
Casstevens. Again, your full testimony is included in the 
record, and you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Thank you very much, Chief.
    Chief Casstevens. Thank you. Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking 
Member Cole, members of the subcommittee, thanks for inviting 
me here today, and I also applaud you for holding this hearing.
    The police want to build a robust crisis response system, 
and we know we can't do it alone. Sadly, the lack of mental 
health treatment options or mental health centers has left 
police officers as the de facto mental health providers in our 
communities. We encounter mental health crisis on a daily 
basis, and we know we are not always the best person to answer 
these calls, but we are the first ones to get the call.
    To better understand the issue, I want to share a brief 
history behind how we got to where we are today. In 1960, the 
United States was a country with a population of 151 million, 
and it had over 600,000 treatment beds for those affected by 
mental illness. Today, we have a population of over 330 
million, and less than 60,000 beds available.
    This drastic change in availability for mental health 
treatment began in 1955 when a massive deinstitutionalization 
movement began that transferred those with mental health 
disorders out of institutions. The belief at the time was these 
institutions were inhumane and that the new use of 
antipsychotic drugs would be an effective alternative. However, 
these good intentions contributed to the mental health crisis, 
since many who were deinstitutionalized were left without 
access to medication or rehabilitation services.
    In the present day, the effects of deinstitutionalization 
are still with us. In fact, the three largest mental health 
facilities in the United States right now are Cook County Jail 
in Chicago, L.A. County Jail, and Riker's Island Prison. And I 
think we can all agree our jails are not where we should be 
housing people suffering from mental health crisis.
    Let me assure you that our organization supports change for 
the mental health crisis in our country. The four most urgent 
concerns that we have are as follows. Number 1 is the sheer 
volume of the problem. Our attention to this issue should be 
the top priority.
    Number 2 is the stigma attached to mental health issues 
continues to hold strong, with individuals having to struggle 
with their illness and how others perceive them.
    Number 3, the individuals in crisis that our officers come 
in contact with are often suffering from mental illness and, at 
the same time, substance use disorder. Sorting out these 
overlapping problems and providing smart, cost-effective, and 
accessible solutions to address them presents an even bigger 
problem. When those individuals experiencing mental health 
crises do seek the help they need, the services in our country 
is not in any way sufficient to meet these needs.
    And we know from our officers on the street that mental 
health program availability for individuals they encounter is 
often either not available, or the waiting period to access 
these programs is so long that it renders the service useless. 
We must continue to call for and support improvements in these 
overarching problem areas as much as we demand and expect 
innovative responses from our officers at first contact.
    Legislative and funding support is absolutely essential to 
the success of local efforts to build safer communities. 
Communities must have adequate resources 24/7 for crisis 
response, treatment, housing, and other services. While there 
have been calls to shift responsibilities away from the police, 
sometimes even removing police from the calls, there must be 
systems in place that allow this to happen in a safe, 
productive way if that is the solution that is deemed best.
    Currently, we play a critical role in responding to mental 
health crisis but need appropriate training to enhance crisis 
response and decision-making about persons experiencing crisis. 
We also need funding assistance and support in establishing the 
successful co-responder models of police and mental health 
professionals. I ask that support come from the subcommittee in 
the form of funding for training, equipment grants, or 
innovative approaches to help encourage collaborative 
partnerships, crisis service, and mental health courts.
    Finally, I would like to take a brief minute to talk about 
one of the approaches that the International Association of 
Chiefs of Police has taken to help aid officers with encounters 
with individuals experiencing crises.
    The One Mind campaign, started several years ago, focuses 
on uniting local communities, public safety organizations, and 
mental health organizations, so that the three become of one 
mind. To join the campaign, law enforcement agencies pledge to 
do the following--establish a defined and sustainable 
relationship with a mental health organization, establish a 
written policy, train and certify 100 percent of their sworn 
officers in mental health awareness in either an 8-hour Mental 
Health First Aid or a 40-hour CIT training.
    On behalf of the IACP, I thank you again for the 
opportunity to discuss this critical problem, and I appreciate 
your time, and I am available for any questions.
    Thank you so much.
    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chair. Thank you very, very much. And thanks to all of 
our witnesses, our presenters today. I think my colleagues and 
I would concur that it is really another one of the hearings 
that we have had where there is such a consistency of message, 
if you will, of identifying the problem and also being very, 
very helpful to us and helping to identify solutions and how we 
might proceed.
    Let me, two questions. I hope I can get to the two 
questions. This one I am going to ask Dr. Dike, but anyone else 
can jump in.
    We know that mental illness and homelessness are a very 
intertwined problem. So a person with mental illness who is 
also homeless is more likely to have an encounter with the 
police and the courts than a person with mental illness who has 
stable housing. And often, it is the police who are called to 
address the problem, and it is actually a social service and 
medical issue for which there may have been limited training.
    My question is how do we better reach people who are 
homeless with mental health services? How can we make treatment 
more widely accessible so we work to break the cycle? And does 
a person experiencing a mental health crisis have a better 
chance of being linked to housing and other supportive services 
if an entity other than law enforcement is the initial 
responder? Dr. Dike.
    Dr. Dike. Thank you very much, Chair DeLauro.
    Let me start my response by bringing in the example of a 
program we have in New Haven which is called the Street 
Psychiatric services. It is run between Yale School of Medicine 
and the Connecticut DMHAS. It has a psychiatrist, a social 
worker, a program coordinator, a vocational specialist, a peer 
support specialist.
    And basically, what this program does is that these 
individuals spend a whole day going to where homeless people 
congregate, encampments, in the parks, New Haven Green. And 
this is not the individuals who would like to come to the 
hospital or go to a clinic, and therefore, you have to meet 
them where they are. And these individuals--by virtue of the 
fact that they also have a prescriber present, engages them as 
they see them on the street--are those who need immediate 
substance use treatment, maybe Suboxone. They are prescribed on 
the spot.
    Those who need other medications are prescribed. If the 
assessment indicates that somebody needs to go into a hospital 
or into a crisis respite center, which they have in New Haven, 
they will do the same exact. So this has been an extremely 
effective program that only started in 2019, and I think that 
the idea of homelessness and obviously all what you said is 
correct, that individuals who are both mentally ill and 
homeless have a worse outcome than those who are mentally ill 
and have housing.
    So housing is extremely important. What leads to 
homelessness in the first place are things that is all put 
together under the social determinants of health, which we 
really need to address as much as possible.
    In our State, another--some of our mobile crisis teams 
actually do the same thing across the State, where they do 
rounds. They go to soup kitchens. They go to encampment areas 
to see individuals who might be demonstrating signs of mental 
illness.
    The idea behind both the Street Psychiatry service and the 
mobile crisis teams that go out is that we found this 
intervention, the first time people might come in contact with 
them would be in a moment of crisis when the police is called, 
and all kinds of things can happen in that situation. But with 
these individuals going to intervene right before this time 
happens, they are able to avert crisis, able to connect 
individuals to the services and resources they need, whether it 
is with the peer support specialists who provide counseling and 
coaching to the individuals who are suffering from mental 
illness.
    So this, I think enhancing the mobile crisis teams such 
that they can do this activity as well would be wonderful and 
helpful. That would be how I would like to approach it, 
certainly what Connecticut is doing to manage the homeless 
population in at least New Haven and New London area.
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you. I will wait, but my second 
question is about bringing programs up to scale.
    Does anyone else have a comment about the issue on mental 
illness and homelessness?
    Ms. Myles. Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am, I do. And thank you so 
much for this question.
    Here in Baton Rouge, we do, we have a crisis response team 
that we work with that go out in the communities. And the cool 
thing about it is, is that we collaborate with our city parish, 
with law enforcement. So we know where those spots are. We know 
where most of the homeless population is, and we go out, and we 
also offer harm reduction because we are seeing that opioids 
and mental health are, you know, hand-in-hand.
    And so we are able to take those crisis mobile teams, and 
not only them, but other organizations as well, get the help 
that they need, refer them to treatment. But we have to work on 
housing because housing is a challenge all over the country.
    The Chair. Okay. Thank you very, very much.
    And now I would like to yield to the ranking member, 
Congressman Cole.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    First, to all of you, thank you for your testimony. Just 
superb testimony, as the chairwoman said, across the board, and 
we are always struck when we see experts from different 
perspectives providing similar answers and pointing to similar 
problems. So it is very, very helpful.
    And Ms. Myles, I would be remiss not to just thank you for 
the very personal nature of your testimony. It is a lot that 
you would come and share this with us. It is very helpful to 
the committee. So, thank you.
    Let me start, if I may, Chief Casstevens, with you. 
Probably when I talk to my police chiefs that I am privileged 
to represent, I always ask them what is your top problem? They 
say mental health every single time, the challenges of dealing 
with it.
    So from your perspective as a law enforcement professional, 
we are picking let us just say three things to really make a 
difference for the average police department in America, if 
there is such a thing as an average police department. They 
obviously vary in size and sophistication.
    But if there were three programs from a law enforcement 
standpoint that you could say, hey, these would really help my 
officers when we are called into situations, and this would be 
something that would reduce the strain on the departments, made 
a successful outcome more likely, what would those things be?
    Chief Casstevens. Well, that is a great question. I thank 
you for that because that is something that I have pondered and 
my colleagues have pondered quite often as we see the 
unprecedented increase in mental health-related calls for 
service over the past 5 to 10 years that, as I said, law 
enforcement, we are the ones out on the streets 24/7. So we are 
the true first responders, and we struggle with this.
    We trained our officers in Mental Health First Aid. We 
trained our officers in crisis intervention. Not as many across 
as I would like to see. We need funding to get some of the 
smaller and medium-sized departments trained because they don't 
have that kind of funding.
    But the various co-responder models that I have heard, and 
I have heard people talk about, I think that is one of the 
things that is going to be very successful. Because law 
enforcement should not be in the business of criminalizing 
mental health issues. I feel horrible about it anytime that we 
have to take somebody who is experiencing a significant crisis, 
and we have to take them into custody because we have no other 
option. There is nowhere else to go.
    And when we take them to a local hospital or facility to be 
evaluated, it is a catch-and-release program in the Chicago 
suburban area. So they are right back, and we have to deal with 
them again and again and again. So we need better services, and 
we need a good co-responder model.
    I would have never thought, as a police chief, that I would 
be hiring a police social worker, but I did 3 years ago. And it 
is the greatest thing that I have done for my officers, that 
she assists them with a lot of these calls for service. But 
that is not cheap, and I wish I could have two more. But I 
don't have the budget funding. I am down five officers right 
now. I would love to hire more police social workers. So that 
would be the second thing.
    And when it comes to homelessness, when you talk around the 
Chicago suburbs, unlike maybe Denver or some other areas that 
have successful programs, we have no place--same as mental 
health, we have no place to go. There just aren't facilities, 
enough facilities in the suburbs of Chicago to take people that 
we encounter that are homeless, and we feel very frustrated 
because we have run out of options.
    So better training and funding for mental health services, 
co-responder model, and more options and facilities to help 
people with housing that are homeless. There is my answer, sir.
    Mr. Cole. Well, that is a great answer, and very, very 
precise and helpful. Thank you.
    Mr. Richardson, let me turn to you very quickly in the time 
I have left because you sort of dealt with this from the other 
side of the equation. And I must say I do worry sometimes about 
potentially sending mental health professionals into dangerous 
situations, and I really do feel that quite often they do need 
an officer with them. Although we need their skill set, maybe 
the officer is there primarily for protection, not for 
intervention. This isn't his line of work.
    Just quickly tell me your experience in working with police 
departments. What are the things that work well, any things 
that are problem areas for you? And I am sorry I didn't leave 
you a lot of time, but whatever insights you could give us I 
would appreciate it.
    Mr. Richardson. No, I really appreciate the time. I think 
Denver has a very wide range of response. We have our co-
responder unit that started in 2016 that really developed 
relationships with officers and how do we help people in mental 
health distress.
    And that allowed STAR to kind of take off with limited, 
very little hurdles, where we were able to respond to people 
without having an officer present. But having both systems 
available is highly important.
    I think the biggest thing that I like to talk about when it 
comes to like sending us based on 911 calls is the recognition 
that a lot of social workers have been doing this for years. 
This is our population we work with. This is the community we 
go into on a regular basis, and these are individuals that I 
know by first name. They just happen to come by a different 
avenue, which is 911, and that still allows me to go and 
perform the stuff I have been doing throughout my entire career 
to be able to help someone in crisis, just in a different 
routing capacity.
    Mr. Cole. Well, thank you very much.
    My time has expired, Madam Chair. But again, thank you for 
this panel. It is an excellent panel. And I yield back.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Lee.
    Ms. Lee of California. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, 
and thank you to our members who suggested this hearing. And 
thank you to all our witnesses.
    Just on a personal level, I have a mental health 
background. I am an MSW, clinical social worker by profession, 
and so this is extremely important just personally for me as a 
professional therapist. And I wanted to ask you a couple of 
questions about this as it relates to African-American men 
specifically.
    I have family members in their 60s and 70s. They won't go 
out walking after 5:00 p.m. without me. If they go in a grocery 
store, even just to buy a banana--and this is--these are 
personal experiences that are constant with myself--they take a 
shopping cart and push it because they are concerned they would 
be arrested for stealing something, and then they would have an 
encounter with the police.
    And I can tell story after story after story that are 
constantly in my life with black men, as well as I am sure 
other members on this committee.
    Now let me ask you a couple of things. First of all, the 
trauma that is associated with being a black man as it relates 
to police encounters is real, and so I am wondering--and if men 
in their 60s and 70s who I know personally are constantly 
fearful of this, there is deep-seated trauma. So what type of 
police training is there to address this type of trauma when we 
know what happens in police encounters when unarmed black men 
are killed, and it could be some traumatic event that takes 
place because of the history of racism in this country. And so 
I am wondering if you all are considering or do you do trauma-
informed training for police officers as it relates to African-
American men?
    And then I want to know what type of mental health services 
are available for individuals who constantly are burdened with 
this trauma and tend to have actually physical conditions 
sometimes evolve as a result of the trauma of mental health 
related to police encounters and the fear of the police?
    Who would be able to answer that? Mr. Richardson maybe? 
Anyone who could answer that, I would like to hear your 
response.
    Ms. Myles. Yes. Yes, I can help answer that. I have been 
working with an organization, Capital Area Human Services, who 
is doing most of the CIT training here in Baton Rouge, 
Louisiana, for many years. And so they are definitely trauma-
informed when it comes to community of color, knowing that the 
history of trauma between African Americans and police and how 
real that is.
    And so part of that CIT training talks about that, and it 
deals with that and talk about ways to de-escalate. And so I 
seen it work not just only with myself, but I have seen it work 
when I have had to be with a family member. And depending on 
what area code they live in, you know, the signal was 
different, and that is the truth.
    And so are we doing a great job? Yes, we are. But we have 
got to even do better, and we have to let people realize that 
trauma is real. That that has been some systemic racism and 
trauma that has been in place for years, what, since the 1960s. 
We were on a call about that, about 911 and crisis and how that 
affected community of color.
    So we are making in-roads. I think all CIT training, that 
needs to be addressed, and we will see a big difference.
    And again, I am excited about 988 because it is easier for 
a family member of color when they can call 988 instead of 
911----
    Ms. Lee of California. Yes.
    Ms. Myles [continuing]. Because they know firsthand they 
are going to get that law enforcement agency.
    Ms. Lee of California. Yes. I have had to call that, yes.
    Ms. Myles. And there is going to be a challenge there. 
Exactly. And so----
    Ms. Lee of California. Mr. Richardson, before my time is 
up, can you talk about what you know as it relates to the 
services in Denver and from the criminal justice perspective 
internally?
    Mr. Richardson. Yes, I think we are being able to identify 
how do we come at stuff from a clinical lens? How do we make 
sure that we are supporting individuals through that trauma-
informed perspective, specifically related to both co-responder 
and our STAR program?
    And then, through the Mental Health Center of Denver is the 
treatment background of allowing individuals to have a place 
where race trauma, race PTSD has a place that could be 
addressed and identified, and really I think what the previous 
presenter kind of referenced is we need to not make this 
something we don't talk about, but it should be something that 
we are acknowledging and recognizing and continue to support 
the community in the stressors that come related to that.
    Ms. Lee of California. Okay. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, Madam Chair, and I would like to talk with you 
offline after this a bit more. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you. Yes, Congressman Harris.
    Mr. Harris. Thanks very much, Madam Chair, for a very 
important and very timely topic.
    I want to reiterate what the ranking member said and 
congratulate Ms. Myles for being here and testifying, 
especially being a peer support specialist because when I have 
dealt with recovering--people who are in recovery, it is so 
important to have peer support like you.
    Dr. Dike, thank you for coming and testifying. I do just 
want to point out one thing in your testimony where you 
referenced the American Journal of Preventive Medicine article 
from 2016, and you imply that fatal encounters with law 
enforcement are disproportionately high among blacks. That only 
is if you refer to population, not to actually the incidence of 
nonfatal violent crime occurring in the United States.
    Actually, if you use that as reference, white deaths by 
fatal encounter with law enforcement is actually 
disproportionately higher probably due to suicide by cop, which 
is disproportionately high among white men. So that is an issue 
that we are going to deal with.
    But I do want to talk about--and Chief, thank you very much 
for testifying. Your testimony, the most important point of 
your testimony is, as a physician, I know, having worked in an 
emergency room, frequently come in contact with my emergency 
medicine colleagues, there is a desperate need for acute 
psychiatric care, and our emergency rooms are not cutting it 
with that. They just don't. The fact of the matter is acute 
psychiatric care is incredibly important.
    So I want to ask Mr. Gebbia, and thank you for the work you 
do. We know that because of the COVID lockdowns, for instance, 
suicide is an increasingly prevalent issue, needs to be dealt 
with. The topic of this is a crisis response system, but I will 
tell you that in the Navy, we had a saying that the Navy went 
from crisis to crisis uninterrupted by plans.
    The fact of the matter is the way to deal with a crisis is 
try to prevent it in the first place, and I am afraid that 
until we deal with the critical lack of acute psychiatric care 
and the ability, for instance, to deliver it because we know in 
the statistics people with depression are both prone to suicide 
and prone to police encounters. That until we make, for 
instance, the more widespread treatment, the new treatments for 
depression, very exciting. Esketamine just being labeled, the 
NMDA modulators, the G-protein-coupled receptor modulators. We 
have some specifics there, but we have to get them to people.
    So, Mr. Richardson, could you specifically address how you 
think we can--not treating the crisis, but what do we need to 
do to avoid these crises from happening?
    Mr. Gebbia. Yes, sir. I think that was a question to me, 
and I think we would agree completely--Mr. Gebbia. I think we 
would completely agree----
    Mr. Harris. Yes, I am sorry. Mr. Gebbia, yeah.
    Mr. Gebbia [continuing]. More upstream prevention so that 
you don't have downstream crisis and people spiraling out and 
then needing to have a crisis response.
    I think there are two things. One, we have to ensure that 
mental health parity allows people to access treatment that 
they can afford. So many people who have ongoing mental health 
conditions don't have access to treatment, can't find a 
provider. There is workforce shortages. Insurances are not 
accepted.
    And we need to have better access to affordable mental 
healthcare. That is one. And certainly tele-mental health is a 
big step in the right direction, especially for places where 
there isn't a lot of mental health providers.
    I would also say education. Family education, working 
through our schools to educate about what to do when you see 
someone appear who is struggling. How to really educate the 
public about mental health in a way that people feel less 
stigmatized and are more likely to seek treatment.
    I think these things, let us remember, so many people who 
are in crisis are not in treatment. So if we can get people 
identified, early intervention, they will then not be in a 
crisis state later downstream.
    So I would agree completely with your suggestion about 
upstream prevention and have to invest in that. That is going 
to cost some money, as you know.
    Mr. Harris. Do you agree with the chief that, in fact, we 
are very under-bedded in acute psychiatric treatment in the 
country, and that is something we need to deal with?
    Mr. Gebbia. Certainly, that is a part of it for people who 
need hospitalization, absolutely. And sometimes the short 
timeframe they are in is not enough time. They are not stable 
enough to be back out in the community, and yet they are 
released.
    I do think that is a part of the picture, but I also think 
there are alternatives. And I think the stabilization centers 
and short-term treatment places, that could really help reduce 
the cost. Because hospitalization is very expensive, and often, 
there is a mismatch. The people who need it are not getting the 
hospitalization, and people who don't need it are going because 
there is nothing else an emergency department can do.
    So I think we have to be better at identifying who needs to 
go into a hospital and who we can treat in other ways.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you. And Madam Chair, I yield back, and 
thank you for the timely topic.
    The Chair. I thank Congressman Harris, and I would just 
also say for a second that it would seem to me that Medicaid is 
one of the biggest sources of being able to pay for this 
treatment. It is for opioid use and for mental healthcare. And 
so it becomes an important source, I think, for coverage and 
funding for behavioral health services. So I think we need to 
think about that expansion as well.
    And with that, Congressman Pocan.
    Mr. Pocan. Great. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    Thanks to all the witnesses. This is a great bipartisan 
hearing. A lot of important issues are coming up, but 
especially I want to say to the chief, thank you for using the 
word ``criminalizing'' mental health issues. I spent a number 
of years in the State legislature. I was the ranking Democrat 
on the committee that oversaw our prison system. Scott Walker 
was the chair before he became governor when we were both in 
the legislature.
    And it always shocked me that we had about 30 percent of 
the population in a Wisconsin prison back then that was there 
for mental health-related issues. And to me, that is inhumane 
to be doing that. It is expensive to be doing that.
    If we had 30 percent of the population in prison for 
cancer, there would be outrage. And yet when it comes to mental 
illness, there is nothing.
    Ms. Myles, thank you very much for sharing your very 
personal story. Very much appreciate that.
    Mr. Richardson, my question for you, one of my main 
counties has tried to do something that you are doing right now 
in Denver. They are getting closer to that. Just can you talk a 
little more about the amount of training that your folks have?
    Like you said, your--many folks have dealt with this 
population for a very long time, but what kind of training do 
they have? What kind of--who provides the training? Can you 
just talk a little bit more about the program itself?
    Mr. Richardson. Yes. So we actually--all of our individuals 
that are on our co-responder and our STAR-based programs are 
licensed clinicians. They have 2 years of field-specific work, 
including higher-level education related to trauma-informed 
care, harm reduction, clinical services, diagnostic criteria.
    And then the Mental Health Center of Denver provides 
additional training that is specific to populations, whether 
that is age related, youth related, individuals with specific 
diagnoses, de-escalation specific training. And then the bonus 
about being partnered with the city entities and kind of 
collaboration across the area is being able to have 
experiential learning through other community providers that 
say we are really good at delivering this service to this 
population. Come and get education, what that looks like.
    And I think that is what breaks down the barriers and silos 
that actually helps develop relationships to help serve the 
population in general, but also gives us more intricate 
training throughout the communities in Denver.
    Mr. Pocan. When you look at the programs that we have at 
the Federal level, how could we prioritize in our upcoming 
funding bills so that States and localities can do what you are 
doing? Do you have any specific recommendations in this area?
    Mr. Richardson. Honestly, I think the funding is the hugest 
part of a lot of these barriers. There is a lot of communities 
that are trying to set stuff like this up. Their biggest worry, 
year to year, is this going to get funded past this year? And 
that should never be a concern with these programs. It should 
be how do we do good work in the communities? With funding 
being something that is just an assumed that it is going to be 
there because these programs do need to exist and do need to 
work collaboratively with the system.
    Mr. Pocan. Yes, I mean, just when you look at the cost of 
incarceration, back then I don't know even know what the figure 
is now. I should know. It was close to $30,000 a year. And you 
have got that many people incarcerated, that alone would give 
you an amazing budget to be able to do far more what we could 
get done.
    A question for Mr. Gebbia, if I could, specifically on LGBT 
youth. The Trevor Project has published a study showing that 
LGBT youth are four times more likely to commit suicide or 
attempt suicide than their peers, and yet they have lower rates 
and access to mental healthcare. Can you just talk a little bit 
about that population, please?
    Mr. Gebbia. Yes, absolutely. And we work closely with 
Trevor Project. We know that need is great for LGBTQ youth in 
particular. And one of the things in the new 988 system we 
would certainly advocate for is to including some type of a 
``press 1'', ``press 2'', you know, kind of an option for LGBTQ 
youth who are in crisis so those calls immediately go to the 
Trevor Project, which has the capacity and has the expertise to 
de-escalate and work with LGBTQ youth in particular.
    So that is an option. It is similar to what we have for 
veterans, which we also support in the current system and will 
be part of 988. So it is an area we need to give more attention 
to.
    We also need to have more providers who are culturally 
competent to work with LGBTQ and especially trans youth because 
of the fact that they are not comfortable sometimes with the 
providers and their training to provide treatment to them.
    Mr. Pocan. Yes, and with all the political rhetoric these 
days, that certainly doesn't help. I know 50 of my 72 counties 
in Wisconsin are I don't know if the right word is ``deserts,'' 
but mental health professional deserts in general, much less 
really specifying populations.
    Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I will yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Fleischmann. Congressman 
Fleischmann.
    [No response.]
    The Chair. When Congressman Fleischmann comes back, we will 
recognize him. Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you 
for this conversation. And I, too, want to say thank you to 
Tonja for her willingness to share a very person story. It 
makes a difference for us.
    I wanted to bring up, let us see, I have a couple different 
questions. I am co-chairing the Bipartisan Addiction and Mental 
Health Task Force, which is the whole goal is to find 
bipartisan solutions to our growing mental health and addiction 
crisis. And one thing that continues to concern me obviously is 
the same thing that we continue to hear is access to care.
    Around 56 percent of the individuals with mental illness do 
not receive that mental health treatment in my district, which 
is located right on the border between two States. So I am 
right near the Portland border and then on our right side to 
Idaho. They can't access or impede access to care.
    So our metro area is across the river. So specifically for 
individuals who are on Medicaid, crossing State lines becomes a 
real barrier with regard to mental health treatment. So for Mr. 
Dike, could you please speak about the current barriers to 
accessing care, and if you have seen the Medicaid piece hold 
people back, I would love to hear about that and what it means 
for people who are seeking treatment.
    And then I have a follow-up.
    Dr. Dike. Thank you very much.
    In terms of barriers to care, I think there are so many 
different things that come together in barriers, apart from the 
lack of adequate workforce. So you know funding has got to pay 
attention to the workforce so that we can have enough people in 
all the different disciplines to provide the care that is 
necessary.
    We also need to increase access in different ways. Maybe 
continuing the use of telehealth so that people can actually 
see specialists from all over the country, all over the State, 
regardless of where they are.
    Then the whole issue about stigma. A lot of effort just to 
go into drumming up the support for mental health services, 
support for accessing care, trying to find out what communities 
need, and collaborating with community agencies, which can be 
even religious organizations, groups, meeting people where they 
are so that you can engage them there.
    We don't need to meet people in a hospital or in a clinic. 
But in fact, our clinicians can spend some time in these 
different locations. In Connecticut, we have IMANI Project, 
which is a project that by some resident who is now faculty at 
Yale, working with church groups in New Haven, especially black 
churches.
    And this is one of the questions about how do you engage 
black people in mental healthcare that the other Congresswoman 
had asked about. You can use this for any other group. It is 
identifying where these people congregate, who they trust, how 
to engage them in those areas so that you can actually provide 
the services they need locally.
    And the whole idea of this crisis response continuum is to 
focus on other types of facilities that can provide short-term 
care and engage people in resources that they need to maintain 
their mental health.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. I appreciate that, and I love that it 
is typically you are seeking partners in the community. I mean, 
that is really how I wish all of our Federal programs would 
work because I think that is the only effective way to really 
make a difference.
    Would you also, Mr. Dike, be willing to speak about 
building crisis response teams and infrastructure to respond to 
children's mental health needs? And I know I think it was Mr. 
Pocan asked, I think he asked a little bit about this, and this 
space about young people.
    And I know, so data from CDC, kids mental health is 
disastrous. And I know in my home State, a typical night at 
Seattle Children's Hospital right now includes admitting one to 
two children who have attempted to take their own lives. So I 
was hoping to hear if you have any wisdom on specifically 
talking about mental health teams for children?
    Dr. Dike. Yes, and I can use Connecticut for you for an 
example. We have also the crisis call lines, the 211 lines, 
that anyone can call in. The schools, parents, concerned 
individuals in the community. And once you call that number, 
you are triaged based on age to mobile crisis teams that are 
funded by Department of Children and Families.
    And this mobile crisis team actually comes to you where you 
are. If you already have providers, they will contact the 
providers to get it, saying what is going on? But the idea is 
that they can examine, you get the histories, and refer you to 
some acute center where you can be held for 2 weeks for 
treatment and so on.
    Of course, if you need hospitalization because of emergency 
situation, they can also refer you there. But this is robust, 
very robust services for children that require that kind of 
collaboration with our State.
    Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you so much. Madam Chair, I 
yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you so much. Congresswoman Frankel.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you, Madam Chair. First off, just thank 
you to all our speakers today, and I think obviously this calls 
for, Madam Chair, increased appropriations for this training 
linking mental health services with our law enforcement.
    I have been texting back and forth with one of my police 
chiefs during this meeting, and I asked him what his greatest 
needs in handling the mentally ill and the homeless? And what 
he said to me was we need more support services and social 
services to assist in the field. We would love trained 
professionals working with us in the field. He also said there 
is a lack of institutions that provide effective treatment and 
supportive housing.
    So to our guests today, one of our colleagues today on a 
caucus call talked about a bill she had to provide Medicaid to 
people in prison so that they could get access to substance 
abuse and mental health services. I would like to get your 
comment on that.
    And the other question I have is there are many law 
enforcement services or agencies throughout the country. Some 
are large, some are small. And your suggestion, how do the 
smaller ones actually get the kinds of services that you are 
mentioning?
    Who wants to take the services in the prison question? 
Anybody?
    Mr. Gebbia. Yes, I would just add that we lose so many 
people to suicide who are incarcerated, and you wonder how 
could that happen? And there are so many best practices that 
aren't used in prison settings, and those who are incarcerated 
should be getting mental health treatment.
    And how it is paid for, it should be the responsibility of 
the institution, the prison system. If they have someone in 
their custody and they need mental healthcare, it should be a 
standard of care. That should be part of what goes into 
accrediting their healthcare in prison systems.
    I think there is not enough focus on those standards, and 
we would urge that that is something that should be provided to 
everyone who is in custody, free of charge. It should be part 
of the cost of the prison system to be able to fund and take 
care of their mental health needs.
    Ms. Frankel. Let me get one more question before we end it. 
I think one of the big concerns in this country right now has 
been the mass shootings, and so many times it seems like it is 
somebody with a mental health issue. So is there any way to be 
screened for this kind of activity?
    Nobody can answer that?
    Chief Casstevens. Well, I will answer----
    Dr. Dike. I think--okay, go ahead.
    Chief Casstevens. I will just answer briefly from a law 
enforcement perspective. It is disheartening to us when we 
experience mass shootings, and when you really dig into the 
background, nearly every time there is either family or friends 
or neighbors who say, well, I was worried about this person or 
he made some disturbing statements in the past. Or a variety of 
things that should have raised a red flag.
    But then this goes back to are the appropriate services 
available? And again, the overall stigma of someone suffering 
from mental health. If you break your leg and you have a cast 
on it, everybody comes running to you to sign your cast. But if 
you have a mental health problem, which is an injured brain 
instead of an injured leg, everybody runs the other way. So 
stigma is part of the issue.
    Dr. Dike. If I may----
    Ms. Frankel. Yes, go ahead, sir.
    Dr. Dike. If I may, this is exactly why we are here today. 
I think this tragic example of mass shootings is the reason why 
communities need to implement crisis services and train police 
officers on how to handle persons in mental health crisis. But 
also I think it is very hard to understand without having the 
training and having that collaboration between police officers 
and mental health professionals to address people in crisis in 
real time before--so that we can avert the unfortunate tragedy 
that you just mentioned.
    Ms. Frankel. Thank you. And just as I yield back, just 
again I want to join my colleagues in thanking Ms. Myles for 
sharing a very personal story.
    Madam Chair, thank you, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Fleischmann.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this 
hearing. I think it is extremely important that we address this 
as a nation and appreciate your doing this.
    In my home State of Tennessee, the suicide rate increased 
by 19 percent from 2014 to 2018 and remains 15 percent higher 
than the national average. Investing in a robust crisis 
response system will help connect at-risk individuals with 
proper mental health resources by utilizing early intervention 
and addressing their immediate needs before connecting them to 
ongoing care.
    My question, and I will open it up for any of the witnesses 
who wish to answer, how can Congress strengthen the crisis 
response infrastructure needed to successful serve our 
constituents? What barriers do rural communities face in 
connecting individuals with the appropriate mental health 
responses and to ongoing care facilities, given the limited 
resources in those areas?
    Thank you.
    Ms. Myles. I think what we are doing here in Louisiana, we 
are really trying to be intentional about making sure we have 
teams that can go out into those rural areas because they are 
not coming to us for so many different reasons, particularly 
transportation. So doing more outreach, identifying those 
organizations that can go with us because we really need 
everybody. Collaboration is key.
    We can talk about the mental health treatment all day long, 
which is paramount, but we have to talk about how do we 
collaborate so people can get the needs that they--their needs 
met, if that is transportation, if that is integrative care, if 
that is housing, which is biggest issue.
    So that is one of the things we are doing. We are doing a 
lot of outreach. We are seeing good outcomes when we are able 
to take those crisis mobile teams or just regular teams into 
those rural areas and then connect them with the resources that 
are nearby and making sure that they know how to refer and get 
to those places. That is working for us really well.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you so much. Would anyone else care 
to comment?
    Mr. Richardson. I think from Denver's standpoint, I think 
the recognition is that there has to be innovation across 
lines, arbitrary lines. Rural communities that don't have 
infrastructure for mental health, the rural communities that 
have understaffing or have the ability to hire people that can 
respond to the crisis.
    We live in a COVID world now that has technological 
advances that we can actually start looking at creative 
partnerships across the area to really provide services to 
areas that may have a need for those responses, but we can do 
it virtually or even be able to collaborate more creatively in 
different areas.
    Mr. Gebbia. I would just add I think that if we think about 
crisis response as a part of the healthcare system, not as 
something separate, but an integral part of the healthcare 
system, it is a door into the healthcare system. But what 
happens long term? I think often what happens, people in crisis 
come into contact, and then they are out of the system again.
    And so if we think about this idea of continuity of care, I 
think that will have a long-term impact on bringing down the 
rate of suicide because those individuals who are in crisis, 
who are struggling, who have suicidal ideation, then will get 
the ongoing help they need. It is not just about the crisis. It 
is about what happens after the crisis that will be more 
preventive from them spiraling again into crisis. So I do think 
that whole idea of continuity of care is really important here 
to get that suicide rate down.
    Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you. Mr. Gebbia, in your written 
testimony, you cited over 25 percent of the calls to State 
lifeline network go unanswered. How will the implementation of 
988 improve response rates and overcome staffing challenges, 
sir?
    Mr. Gebbia. Well, it won't unless we invest in the 
infrastructure, especially in the local crisis centers, who 
then link to the national lifeline and then have to answer 
those calls. If they don't have more staffing, more training, 
and then we don't fill the infrastructure, we are very 
concerned that with the promotion of 988, which is wonderful, 
the call volume will go up dramatically. Some estimates are 
double and more than that.
    But if we don't build the infrastructure to support that, I 
am concerned that calls will go--more calls will go unanswered. 
Wait times will go up. And once people have a bad experience, 
they are not going to do it again. I think it is really 
important we get this right, and that means investing in the 
infrastructure of those local centers.
    Mr. Fleischmann. I want to thank all the witnesses for 
their testimony and their answers.
    Madam Chair, I yield back. Thank you.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you to each of the witnesses for the information that 
you have shared, the enlightenment that I have experienced that 
you all are functioning under. And thank you very much, of 
course, again, Ms. Myles, for sharing your personal story.
    There are a lot of issues that we need to be dealing with 
here, Madam Chair, and I hope that at some point, we will talk 
to other people in this circle, particularly as it relates to 
what happens with mental health illness when you are 
incarcerated and what kind of services follow you out when you 
are let out of these facilities.
    I also wanted to talk to you all about youth, suicide among 
African-American youth and other youth of color, and even the 
challenges to the LGBTQ community and the trans community and 
other communities, American indigenous communities. Just last 
night, I am happy to say that my bill Pursuing Equity in Mental 
Health Act passed the House, and that bill came out of a result 
of an emergency task force that I want to look at the impact of 
the suicide ideation, suicide aspiration, and suicide success 
among minority--minority youth.
    And what it shows us is that on that level and other 
levels, there is a real challenge for cultural competence. 
Providers, diversity of providers, at the schools, at the 
centers, et cetera. And so I am very concerned that you all 
have spoken to very successful, evidence-based programs. I 
don't know to what extent you were thinking about youth, and 
minority youth in particular, as you were talking. But I would 
like to know what is it that we are doing, should be doing, and 
need to support to include greater diversity among providers, 
greater trusted voices among those that you interact with, 
cultural competent training on those who would be answering 988 
calls or any other calls, and cultural competency in places 
like our police forces to actually understand, get the 40 hours 
training or the whatever training. But in addition, cultural 
competence training to recognize when one is in a mental health 
crisis and when one is really a threat.
    And so may I start with you, Dr. Dike? And then I really 
would like to hear from you, Chief.
    Dr. Dike. Thank you very much.
    There is no doubt that systemic racism sometimes has played 
a really negative role on the mental health impacts of young 
black people, especially not just from the point of view of 
lack of adequate workforce or adequate individuals with 
cultural competency to attend to them, but even hesitancy to 
accept care.
    The fact that individuals might feel that they are not 
treated with respect and dignity when they approach mental 
healthcare institutions, the fact that my colleagues and our 
colleagues in the healthcare systems have not been proactive in 
reducing the concerns and anxieties of this in the young people 
when they come to us is extremely important.
    So just that idea alone is important. But there is a larger 
problem here of access. The access includes lack of jobs, poor 
schools. I think we need to really go back. Poor schools lead 
to lack of jobs, lead to underinsured or low insured, lead to 
poor access to preventive care, lead to poor access to 
healthcare at all.
    So there is a whole bunch of things we need to do together.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Doctor. Could I just hear 
for a few seconds from the chief? Because I am very impressed 
with his observations about the need in this space.
    Chief Casstevens. Thank you.
    First of all, it is a difficult situation. It is disturbing 
for law enforcement. Anytime we see somebody who is thinking 
about suicide, attempted suicide, suffering from mental health 
issues, it is even twice as bad when we see it in youth. It is 
incredibly disheartening for law enforcement.
    But I think that situation, like so many others, it goes 
back to the police departments have to build trust in their 
community. The families and the people who are suffering need 
to know that if they do call the police that we are going to 
come there to help. We are not coming there to arrest. Our job 
is to provide help.
    And if we can continue with a co-responder model, I think 
we are going to be incredibly successful in this arena.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. My time is up.
    Madam Chair, I hope we do have a second line of 
questioning.
    The Chair. Let us see where we are on timing. I would be 
more than happy to do that. I think this is a great 
conversation.
    Congressman Cline.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this hearing 
on this important topic. And I want to thank the witnesses for 
attending as well.
    Mental health and substance abuse, developmental 
disability, all of these things affect people of all ages and 
from all backgrounds. These constitute an important area that 
needs the Federal, State, and local levels of government 
working together collaboratively. And during my time serving as 
a delegate in the Virginia General Assembly, I served as the 
chair of the Mental Health Subcommittee and authored several 
bills that were sign into laws to ensure that the Commonwealth 
was able to appropriately connect individuals with their needed 
resources.
    Several of the bills I sponsored worked to establish a 
State registry of available acute psychiatric beds in both 
public and private psychiatric facilities and residential 
crisis stabilization units, requiring this registry to be 
updated daily. The goal was to ensure that once individuals 
were receiving the help they needed, they would not be streeted 
after a certain amount of time and would be able to get the 
help that they needed and deserved.
    Work in this space is of great importance. So I am glad we 
are discussing it today.
    I also want to take a moment during National Law 
Enforcement Week to recognize and thank all of those police 
officers who so often are the first responders to assist in 
getting individuals connected with the help they need.
    With that, I would ask Chief Casstevens, although there is 
much work to be done, I am thankful that the recent national 
dialogue has been focused on destigmatizing the utilization of 
mental health resources. There are certain professions, such as 
the police force and military service, where the resources are 
particularly needed, but the stigma associated with them 
remains unfortunately high.
    How can we more effectively ensure that these resources are 
offered such that those professionals can benefit from their 
availability? Those in these professions have given so much of 
themselves, and ensuring they have the care they need is of 
utmost importance.
    Chief Casstevens. Well, thank you, sir, for bringing that 
topic up. That is a topic that has been near and dear to my 
heart, police officer mental health, PTS, and police officer 
suicide. Sadly, but an example, in 2019 we lost 128 officers 
killed in the line of duty. We lost 228 officers to suicide.
    And part of that, like everyone else, is the stigma 
surrounding that. Many officers are afraid to report to their 
chief that they are suffering from mental health issues. They 
are afraid they are going to lose their job in many cases.
    And I think over the last few years, we have made 
incredible strides. I work also with an organization called 
Blue H.E.L.P., which is specifically an agency that assists law 
enforcement entities in developing a program to help officers 
who are suffering from mental health issues or contemplating 
suicide. And one of the biggest things that we have determined 
is we have to have a multipronged approach.
    Most police agencies have EAP, Employee Assistance Program, 
but in most cases, it is not trusted because they feel it is 
not confidential. What has been more successful is developing 
peer support groups. Officers trust having a conversation with 
other officers. And IACP has a program called CRI-TAC, which 
provides funding and professionals to law enforcement agencies 
to help develop a successful peer support team in their law 
enforcement agency.
    And again, it goes back to having the resources that 
officers trust, but at the same time reducing that stigma. 
Every police chief needs to say to their officers, it is okay 
not to be okay.
    I was asked by a Chicago Tribune reporter last year when I 
discussed this, and he said, wait a minute. If you send an 
officer to mental health services, how comfortable are you 
going to feel putting that officer back on the street? And my 
answer is I will feel more confident in that officer than the 
officers I know that might be out there who are refusing, for a 
variety of reasons, to seek assistance.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you for that.
    As I discussed back in a hearing we had on March 11 on 
COVID and the mental health and substance abuse crisis, the 
mass Government shutdowns have had a significant negative 
impact on many people's mental health and substance abuse, as 
well as on those who are directly impacted by those needs being 
unmet. This has been seen through increased calls to helplines 
and fewer professionals who traditionally aid at connecting 
individuals to help.
    Can you discuss some of the challenges that arose due to 
those shutdowns, or that might be a question better answered by 
another witness if they want to weigh in?
    Ms. Myles. You mean just for people in general, sir?
    Mr. Cline. Absolutely.
    Ms. Myles. Yes, so one of the things that we have been 
doing that kind of started in Baton Rouge, but it escalated to 
other places is calling Healing Circles, where we are able now 
to have people to log in and provide a space for them, a safe 
space for them online. And that has been really helpful in 
connecting people to resources and to the help that they need.
    Mr. Cline. Thank you for that, and thank you for sharing 
your story with us. I appreciate you being here today.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Harder.
    And let me just say, Congressman Harder, I want to thank 
you and Congresswoman Lawrence for really requesting this topic 
here and this hearing. I think it has been a very, very 
powerful discussion already. And thank you very, very much for 
recognizing the issue and how critically important it is.
    So, Congressman Harder.
    Mr. Harder. Really thank you so much, Chair DeLauro, for 
putting this together. I agree it has been very powerful, and I 
really want to thank our witnesses as well for sharing their 
incredibly informative testimonies, and I hope we are able to 
take this hearing and put it into our budget and do what we can 
to address some of the issues raised today.
    But before I begin, I also just want to acknowledge a 
tragedy that happened in my community this week. Officer Jimmy 
Inn lost his life in the line of duty, leaving behind his 
wife--a fellow member of the department--and three kids, 
including a 7-month-old son. Officer Inn was a member of the 
Honor Guard, deeply respected in the community. His chief 
called him the epitome of what a police officer should be, and 
I know our prayers are with his family and his department.
    Officer Inn's death is another reminder of the work that we 
need to do trying to get our communities and our police 
officers together and make sure that everybody goes home safe 
at the end of the night. So in terms of a question, I know we 
talked a little bit today about how much we have to do to 
improve mental healthcare. Very encouraging to hear some of the 
models that have been proven successful in Denver and other 
cities across the country.
    These models share a lot of similarities, but they also 
have some pretty significant differences, whether or not they 
invest in more training for police officers, whether or not 
they are creating new community-led models.
    Mr. Casstevens, my first question is for you. What have you 
found to be the most successful partnership models? And do you 
think it depends on community needs, and we should really just 
evolve that in terms of what works best for one community may 
not be successful elsewhere? Or are there lessons and models 
that we could be doing to make sure that that is sort of 
systematically strengthened across the country?
    Chief Casstevens. Thank you. I do think it depends upon the 
community. Some of the programs I have heard, especially in 
Denver, the STAR model and some of the other ones, I am going 
to steal those and put my name on it. I think those are some 
great programs. This is what I love is when we can share ideas.
    But it is much like many other things, much like policing. 
In any community, it varies--the approach and the methods--in 
every community because it is based on the community needs. I 
would never have thought that in Buffalo Grove, Illinois, 
outside Chicago where I am police chief, that over the last 5 
years the number of mental health calls for service has 
increased exponentially.
    We are--my officers, and I have only got 63 sworn, we are 
responding to at least 2 or 3 a day. And 5 years ago, it may 
have been 2 or 3 a month. So the needs are there, but the 
resources over those years have not changed.
    And so our officers and me, as the chief, I am throwing my 
hands up. I am like I am looking for the resources. There are 
some great ideas across the country, but it comes down to 
funding. And not to drag this point out, but funding is an 
issue for law enforcement right now. I am not going to go into 
the defunding issue, but funding as a whole because of loss of 
revenues in cities due to COVID, loss of gas tax, real estate 
transfer tax, et cetera, I am losing officers.
    I am down a number of sworn officers right now. I don't 
have the funds to hire them back. So I certainly don't have the 
funds to put together a robust program. So I am looking for a 
State or Federal grant for that because there is a true need.
    Mr. Harder. Thank you. I appreciate that.
    Mr. Richardson, a similar question to you. To what degree 
do you think the Denver model is applicable to other cities and 
to what degree that there may be some differences and nuances, 
and how did you come up with the model that you have used, as 
opposed to some of the differences that we are seeing in other 
cities across the country?
    Mr. Richardson. Yes, I think Denver, when we are talking 
with other communities that are trying to set up co-responder 
programs or STAR-based programs, it really is specific to how 
is it going to work within that community, what barriers? And 
we give them the information related to us, which is we are a 
partnership with the city from a--the mental health provider, 
nonprofit mental health provider.
    So it is not just about the crisis response to it. It is 
immediate access to treatment after the fact. If someone says 
that they are ready, in that moment we want to be able to 
provide by the Mental Health Center of Denver whatever service 
they are looking for, immediate access. Strike while the iron 
is hot.
    And I think when we were initiating our STAR program, it 
really was going up to Eugene, Oregon, and stealing all the 
information we could from CAHOOTS, which is going to go down as 
like the grandfather of all these responses. But they had a 
successful model for 30-plus years, and it has really shown 
what groundwork can be for how CAHOOTS is a name recognition 
within their community. And then we took that information to 
Denver to be able to say this is how we are going to ground our 
program, and then be able to build it Denver-centric, and then 
be able to provide that information to whatever community may 
need it for the future to kind of build on what Denver has as 
well.
    Mr. Harder. Thank you. Thank you. Well, I appreciate all 
your testimonies, and it was very powerful, as the chair said. 
And I am so excited to see you all.
    With that, I will yield back the lack of remainder of my 
time, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Lawrence. I know she 
was shuttling between committee hearings. Congresswoman 
Lawrence, there you are.
    Thank you. Thank you for both you and Mr. Harder, as I 
said, for wanting to do this hearing. Appreciate it.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you.
    As many of you may know, I really feel that the mental 
health survival of our country is based upon our leadership. 
And thank you so much for the witnesses that are here today. I 
know for a fact mental health has an impact on our children 
now. With COVID, it just ripped the scab off, and so we see all 
of these challenges.
    With our policing in America, it breaks my heart when I see 
these videocams of a person clearly having a psychotic incident 
and being put in handcuffs and slammed to the ground. As a 
former mayor, in looking at the 9/11 dispatch system, knowing 
that when someone called, ``What is your problem? What is your 
situation?'' Very few people say, ``Can you send me a 
psychologist or someone to help me, to help my family member 
who has--who is off their meds, who is having an incident.'' 
What they do, they say, ``I need someone to control this 
person,'' and that usually our only resource is to send a 
person trained to use a gun, a taser, and to arrest that 
person.
    Can someone here on this committee answer this question for 
me? And I appreciate that we are using some models in other 
countries--I mean, other States that we really need to look at. 
Can we make an impact if we don't build--this is the other 
point I want to make.
    My hospitals continuously tell me about the challenges they 
are having in the ER because the mentally ill are being taken 
to a physical health facility, and they are dropped off. And 
they usually don't have beds, and they are in the aisle. They 
are attacking the workers there because they are there to treat 
physical illness, not mental health.
    Can we change or address this issue if we don't invest, and 
how do you have any--how can we invest in the infrastructure 
for mental health so that we can all be together, working 
together, and taking care of those in need?
    Ms. Myles. I would like to address that. So one of the 
things that we are grateful to have is called the Crisis Now 
model that is a part of RI. And what it does, it puts 
everything in a place, particularly to a stabilization--a 
stabilization unit where people can go to where when they do--
first of all, we have to educate people that you have the 
right, when you call law enforcement, to tell them you would 
like a CIT-trained police officer.
    And hopefully, most organizations will have them because 
they know what to do when they go to a Code 68, and having a 
place where police officers can take someone, where they can 
drop them off in 5 to 7 minutes, not stay there for 3 or 4 
hours until they get things straight.
    So when we decided we needed to have something done in 
Baton Rouge, we got a tax pass for our stabilization unit, and 
inside that unit, we have a different number of things--
respite, we have detox, we have the living room model. And that 
has been working really well.
    And what other States are doing and other cities are doing 
it as well, because we kind of looked at them to see what they 
were doing and how it would fit--how it would fit Baton Rouge, 
and we have had great success. That Crisis Now model is 
something that I think people need to really look at, and it 
can address a lot of the different things that you just talked 
about. And we are seeing it make a difference.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you. For the police, can someone 
address how do you handle the place to take someone? Even if 
you have a trained professional, where do you take them? What 
do you recommend we look of having a plan in America? And in 
Michigan, we totally shut down all of our mental health 
facilities.
    Chief Casstevens. Well, therein lies part of the issue I 
think is, historically, as a society, we have defunded mental 
health, and we have now laid that on the doorstep of law 
enforcement because nobody has anywhere else to turn. Now we 
are slowly making progress. But speaking for my officers and 
other agencies in Illinois, what you just stated was the 
biggest problem.
    People will call the police. We see somebody suffering from 
a mental health issue. We have trained our officers in CIT. We 
have trained them in Mental Health First Aid. We have trained 
them in de-escalation. The last thing we want to do is put 
handcuffs and take them to a police station because we have 
nothing to treat them with here.
    So the best thing we can do is take them to a mental 
facility that we have developed a relationship with. But as our 
other witness stated, taking them to the emergency room, they 
are not equipped to do that. They are dealing with injuries. 
They are not equipped to deal with mental health crises, and so 
it is always often a quick evaluation and a catch-and-release 
program.
    And it is so frustrating for law enforcement because we 
want people to get help, but we have nowhere to take them.
    Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you. And I think this committee should 
really look at the model that has become the point of the 
identification having a trained response. So where do we put 
these individuals after they are captured--not captured, but 
after they have intervened to place them in a place where the 
help they need is available?
    Thank you, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Bustos.
    Mrs. Bustos. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Dr. Dike and Dr. Gebbia, I want to say, first of all, thank 
you for your kind words and your testimony about the 
subcommittee's work to provide a 5 percent crisis care set-
aside in the mental health block grant. Like you, I was very 
pleased that we were able to pass this provision out of my 
Crisis Improvement and Suicide Prevention Act, that we could 
turn that into law.
    The crisis funding helps mental health providers all over. 
In districts like mine, we have Rosecrance in Rockford, 
Illinois; Robert Young Center for Community Mental Health in 
the Quad Cities; and UnityPlace in Peoria, Illinois. And they 
fund crisis call centers, mobile units, so they can travel to 
patients in crisis and so much more. You get the picture.
    I also want to say thank you to the American Psychiatric 
Association and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention 
and so many others who supported this effort.
    My question to both of you is if you could be specific in 
how this dedicated crisis care funding is helping States and 
providers so we have a good picture on that.
    Dr. Dike, why don't you start, please?
    Dr. Dike. Well, thank you very much for that.
    I would say that the funds provided by this subcommittee--
by the way, thank you all for doing that. It was very helpful, 
sorely needed. But different States are using them differently, 
depending on their needs.
    I will give you a couple of examples. Some States are 
supplementing their existing crisis system. For example, in 
Connecticut, the initial goal was to expand our mobile crisis 
to 24/7 across all the different areas of Connecticut. Before 
then, even though we had mobile crisis across all of 
Connecticut, not all of them were 24/7, and that is really 
important because crisis does not time itself when it happens. 
So that is one way that that is happening.
    Some other States are actually starting from scratch, quite 
frankly. They are building up their whole emergency crisis 
system from scratch. Some States are starting, laying emphasis 
on the 988 implementation program--Connecticut is one of them--
mobile crisis teams that I mentioned, crisis stabilization 
units.
    Now we don't have that in Connecticut yet, but that is 
really an important area for us. I happen to be the guy in the 
middle when emergency rooms are calling because they have too 
many people in the emergency rooms with mental health 
disorders, and I am the chief medical officer for the panel on 
mental health, and they are saying, ``Where do we move these 
individuals?''
    So the continuum of crisis care centers, the importance of 
them cannot be overemphasized. Even clinical respite crisis 
beds in that continuum would be very helpful. Some States are 
using it as a one-time fund for a crisis receiving and 
stabilization infrastructure for children and families. Others 
are using the funds for stakeholder engagement and additional 
planning. Some are using it to increase operations with peer 
support and peer respite programs to add to mobile crisis 
because it is really important for individuals who have lived 
experience to participate in this process.
    So there is a lot of important ways that States are using 
it. Give back.
    Mrs. Bustos. Dr. Gebbia, do you want to add anything to 
add, please?
    Mr. Gebbia. Yes. I think that is exactly right. Each State 
is using these funds slightly differently depending on what 
infrastructure they already have and what the needs are, and I 
think that is the right way to approach it.
    I would say this, though. I think it is a start, but I do 
think that that level of funding is not going to go all that 
far when you look at such massive change in how we want to 
respond to crises. And I would certainly suggest that we 
increase, if possible, that percent because, in fact, most 
States are not going to be able to implement enough change as a 
result of that, although it is a terrific start, and we support 
it and thank you for that.
    I would just add one other thing. I do think that as we 
look at changing the system, we are going to need to invest a 
lot more over time. As 988 gets out there and demand goes up, 
States are going to find they are overwhelmed. I do think that 
we have to continue to look at all of these aspects, mobile 
crisis training to the infrastructures we are going to need, to 
how it works. How does 988 work with 911? What is the 
separation?
    All of these things we have been talking about, but I do 
think that block grant is a step in the right direction. We are 
grateful for it. If that could be increased, I think the States 
will be able to use it wisely.
    Mrs. Bustos. I have got a little less than 30 seconds. So 
let us play off of that very quickly.
    I also support increasing the crisis care set-aside to 10 
percent. If quickly you could outline why that would be needed 
to the point that you just made, Dr. Gebbia, and how this 
increase would help our communities?
    Mr. Gebbia. Well, I think, again, it would just let them 
move faster in terms of--and more deeply in terms of how they 
set up crisis response and all the kinds of alternatives we 
have been talking about throughout this hearing. I think it 
would provide a higher level of support that they need. 
Appreciate that.
    Mrs. Bustos. All right. Very good. I am out of time.
    With that, Chair DeLauro, I yield back. Thank you so much.
    The Chair. Thank you. And what we are going to do now is 
this really is a kind of a lightning round, 2 minutes, and I 
will hold folks to the 2 minutes so that we can get more 
questions answered today. And I want to thank you all for the 
questions you already have asked and also for the clarity of 
the response and the candor of your responses from your 
professional background.
    Let me just very, very quickly for myself. We have talked 
about a lot of programs. There are a lot of programs out there. 
We have provided funding in the block grant. Just now tell me, 
because I have heard everyone say here today that, you know, we 
have got some States are doing this, some States are doing 
that, some places are not doing anything. How do we, in your 
view, reach the country, if you will, in getting up to speed on 
what is out there?
    There are a lot of models, models that are working very, 
very well. And I would like--I am going to ask each of you, but 
very, very quickly to tell me how do we get to every State, 
police department, et cetera, and try to move these models 
forward.
    I understand the funding issue, but how do we get word out 
about what they are to try to be doing to deal with this issue?
    Chief Casstevens. Well, I can say from a law enforcement 
perspective, 45 years in the business, and through the 
International Association of Chiefs of Police, we have 31,500 
members in 165 countries. We come out with great programs, and 
in a day, we can push those programs out to all of our 31,000 
members. And we cover all 50 States. We cover State police, 
sheriff, every law enforcement agency in the country.
    The Chair. Okay. Quick.
    Mr. Gebbia. And I would add--I would add that as 988 
becomes the reality, we need to look at how do we build it out. 
And I think we have 2 years, less than 2 years now, to be able 
to do that. So I would urge that we really look at trying to 
make this a uniform system around the country, provide the 
guidance and the standards that will make that happen, along 
with the funds.
    The Chair. Okay.
    Ms. Myles. I believe what we are doing now, you guys are 
definitely leading by example, and we appreciate that. And I 
think having more conversations like this, inviting more States 
into these spaces and having people to share what they are 
doing would be great. Because we don't need to duplicate and 
reinvent the wheel. We can do it. We don't have to reinvent 
this this year.
    The Chair. Chris, I am going to give you a second.
    Mr. Richardson. These programs are out there. They have 
shown success across different cities and communities, and I 
think it is about a conversation and communication. And being 
able to be vulnerable and say ``I don't have all the answers, 
and I want to be a little--create partnerships that are 
creative that can be part of a solution.
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you all. And with that, I also 
think that we can help to play a role at the Federal level of 
really getting word out and information out and helping to get 
people access to some of these programs.
    Congressman Cole.
    Mr. Cole. Madam Chair, our time is short, I know. So I am 
going to yield my--I am going to have an opportunity to comment 
at the end and make the points I want to make. But again, I 
just want to thank the witnesses we have. I just think this has 
been an absolutely terrific panel in every way.
    So, again, I will comment at the end. Yield back.
    The Chair. Okay. Thank you.
    If I can--let me just get to Congresswoman Frankel.
    [No response.]
    The Chair. Okay. Congresswoman Watson Coleman. No, it is 
Congressman Harris there. I am sorry.
    Mr. Harris. Yes, thank you very much. And thank you for the 
second round.
    Let me just ask Mr. Richardson. I am fascinated by the STAR 
program. From some of the reports I read, about a third of the 
calls to this mobile unit actually come from police who, I 
guess, have responded and realized they were really not 
appropriate for it.
    But could you just let us know, so if we had all these 
around, that is great, but you still have to bring the person 
with mental health issues somewhere. And what are you doing in 
Denver to alleviate the problem with the--again, whether it is 
a 24-hour, 72-hour facility. I mean, it is just not enough to 
have that van. You have got to bring the person somewhere.
    Where do you see that, the need for that? And what are you 
doing in Denver for that need?
    Mr. Richardson. Yes, we are actually in collaboration with 
other community members to be able to transport people to their 
facilities, whether that is a day shelter, whether that is 
their treatment provider. But we also have a pre-established 
walk-in crisis center that is a 24/7 capability.
    So being able to collaborate with them. We don't want 
people in the hospital either. That is not a solution for 
people that are really trying to get long-term help. So the 
walk-in crisis center within Denver allows us the ability to 
get people to someone where time is not an issue, that they can 
have someone there talking with them about what next steps they 
need to make sure that they are safe and that they have 
support.
    And Denver also is establishing, I believe, on Monday it is 
called the Solution Center, and it is going to be a 24/7 police 
drop-off, followed by 7-day respite, followed by 30-day kind of 
residential to really make sure that people that are in 
distress and need support and need access to treatment, both 
physical, mental health, whatever the spectrum of that is, have 
access to that.
    So I think we have really created kind of an infrastructure 
of crisis support outside of just hospitalization.
    Mr. Harris. How are those two centers funded?
    Mr. Richardson. Caring4Denver--well, it is complicated. All 
over the place. [Laughter.]
    Mr. Harris. As I imagined. Thank you very much.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Harris. I think you were muted, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think this 
has been a terrific panel, which has really let us think about 
what are the other areas that we need to be thinking about.
    I know this is more crisis oriented, but I also know that 
many of these individuals that we encounter with a mental 
health crisis also have a substance abuse crisis. I know they 
can be taken into a crisis center. I know that they can be 
taken in for 28 days in certain circumstances.
    But it doesn't seem to me from what past experiences I have 
observed personally that 28 days is not enough days to really 
stabilize somebody. You can detoxify them. You can take them 
out of a trauma. But are there not more needs, Dr. Dike, are 
there not longer, more longer-term, not acute hospitals, but 
facilities that will address these types of individuals on a 
longer-term basis to ensure stability in what you have been 
able to do to de-traumatize them and to detoxify them?
    Dr. Dike. Absolutely. Every single individual in crisis is 
one person in crisis. They all have different needs.
    In Connecticut, we have the civil commitment for substance 
use disorders that allows us to keep people in the hospital for 
up to 6 months and then go into long-term residential 
placements that are specific for substance use disorder. So 
beyond the 28 days.
    Mrs. Watson Coleman. Let me just say that what I have heard 
today are very good programs in very enlightened States and 
organizations. Madam Chairman, we need to figure out a way to 
get that information out to all States, to incentivize States 
to engage in these kind of proactive and reality-based and 
real-time based issues and make sure that wherever you live, 
you have access to adequate care.
    Thank you, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you. And you are absolutely right. And we 
are going to get our witnesses here today to give us a hand 
with that, and I think the police talked about that as well 
through the IACP.
    Congressman Harder.
    Mr. Harder. That is wonderful. I have a follow-up on Dr. 
Harris' point with his--the coordination that we are seeing on 
the front end of dealing with these calls is--it is terrific, 
and there is obviously lots of models there. But it doesn't do 
us much good if there is no place for people to actually go.
    And Dr. Dike, you talked a little bit in your testimony 
about how underserved we are across the country with available 
mental health resources. We certainly see that in our neck of 
the woods. In the Central Valley, we have half the doctors 
overall that other areas of California and very few mental 
health practitioners.
    In your experience, what role could we play to address the 
issues of emergency room boarding of patients, and what should 
we be doing to systematically support and make sure that there 
is resources for folks to go, no matter how things are 
operating with the police department?
    I think you may be on mute, sir.
    Dr. Dike. Oh, thank you very much.
    It is actually tragic that we are boarding psychiatric 
patients in emergency rooms. Emergency rooms are loud, chaotic, 
more likely actually to cause more deterioration in people's 
mental health than not. So the kind of services that we need 
would be a range of services that can cater for people at 
different stages.
    After 24 hours, all these things we have talked about--
crisis stabilization, long-term respite care, and we have what 
we call intermediate care system in Connecticut where people 
can then move from these crisis areas to a lesser restrictive 
hospital and then to--we have--Connecticut has worked really 
hard to have robust outpatient residential programs so that 
these individuals can then go into.
    There is a whole range of communication and collaboration 
that needs to happen in communities for this stage to be 
successful. So not just hospitals, but respite care, crisis, 
residential homes, and so on.
    Mr. Harder. I think what all of our witnesses have really 
hammered home is that there is obviously no silver bullet here. 
We need to make sure that that continuum of care is 
strengthened across the entire lifecycle of these 
interventions.
    So thank you so much for your testimony, and Madam Chair, I 
yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very, very much.
    And now let me yield to the ranking member for any comments 
that you may have before we close out the hearing.
    Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you again 
for a great hearing, great panel, and thank my colleagues--Mr. 
Harder, Mrs. Lawrence--for suggesting this. Again, excellent 
suggestion, great hearing.
    A couple of things. Again, there is a big unanimity across 
very many different perspectives here that is actually very 
helpful to us as a committee when we have renowned experts in 
the field. And we have got police officers, and we have got 
folks that work with police departments, and we have got people 
that have individual experience, and they are all telling us 
very similar things about what we need and the importance of 
pairing mental health professionals with police officers so we 
can respond to these calls.
    Unfortunately, of course, a lot of us represent areas 
where, for instance, a team approach probably not going to 
happen because there is not enough mental health professionals 
out there in the first place in smaller communities. It is one 
thing to find those kind of folks in Denver or Chicago and 
their environs. It is quite another thing in Wewoka, Oklahoma, 
or Chickasha, Oklahoma. But I get the exact same concerns from 
the police chiefs that I talk about in those communities. They 
are running into exactly the same kinds of problems and, as 
Chief Casstevens suggested, with increasing frequency.
    I will reflect I remember dealing, Madam Chair, when we 
passed the CARES Act and kind of like all authorizing 
committees, our friends at E&C authorized more money than we 
could possibly ever have as appropriators, and one of the 
members of that committee--and there were some terrific 
authorizations for mental health matters. And one of the 
members of the committee came to visit me about all these 
programs, and I said, well, that is great, but the Budget 
Committee has actually given me $5,000,000,000 less this year 
than I had last year.
    And I said, now that is going change. We are going to come 
to an agreement, and there is going to be more defense 
spending. Then that is going to call for more Labor-H spending. 
But we are not going to have the dollars that we would need to 
fund everything you have authorized. So give me one or two 
things that would really make a difference.
    And he thought for a minute, and he said, you know, the 
biggest single problem we have is just the shortage of trained 
professionals and probably anything you could do to incentivize 
the education of more professionals. Otherwise, he said, you 
set up these programs, you just get into a bidding war over the 
supply that you have.
    So I don't think that is a solution. I think, again, some 
of these suggestions about team programs and shared resources 
and certainly additional training for our police officers, but 
also the ability to know when their very limited additional 
training isn't going to be enough, and they are going to have 
to have a professional. And then by the same token make sure 
that our professionals, we sometimes are asking to go into very 
dangerous situations with folks that aren't criminally intent 
on doing any damage but are mentally of a state of mind where 
they might.
    The proper pairing of these resources together is a tricky 
issue and probably not something we can manage from here. It is 
going to take a lot of good judgment locally. Programs like 
what Mr. Richardson talked about in Denver, which certainly 
seems to be a model that we ought to be looking at.
    Now let me just end with this. I suspect this is one of 
those things where we are going to be expanding in the years 
ahead. I think we have got a series of hearings that suggest 
how underfunded we are in the mental health area, how many more 
professionals that we need.
    I would also, though, caution our witnesses that it is not 
all going to come from the Federal Government. We can't take 
care of every police department in America, every State in 
America. There has got to be enhanced State and local effort in 
these areas. These actually aren't traditionally Federal 
responsibilities, although I think there is a really important 
role here to play in terms of model programs, incentives, 
grants, and the like. And I could be persuaded to go beyond 
that, quite frankly, because I just think the need is there.
    Again, I talk with too many police chiefs who tell me over 
and over this is their number-one problem. They don't feel like 
they have got the local staff they need to deal with it. They 
don't have the places to take people, and that is a real 
problem. They quite often have--typically, they are from 
smaller communities with relatively limited forces.
    My police forces, they dispatch an officer for a day or 2 
days as they look for some sort of appropriate place for the 
person to stay and get some sort of treatment that just doesn't 
exist in their communities. And they are driving hours, 
sometimes days. So it is a real problem.
    But again, a lot of creative suggestions here. I thank all 
our witnesses for that.
    I thank our members for the obvious bipartisan interest and 
participation in this particular hearing.
    And Madam Chair, again, I thank you. I think this was a 
very important hearing for us to have, and I am glad you 
scheduled it. And I think you could see from the involvement on 
both sides of the aisle, this is clearly an area where there is 
great potential for bipartisan cooperation, and I hope we are 
given the budget to do something here, and we plan to work with 
you in a productive way in this particular area.
    So thank you very much, and with that, I yield back. Other 
than just thank the witnesses again. We see a lot of panels up 
here. We have a lot of good panels up here, quite frankly. But 
this has absolutely been one of the best panels I think, Madam 
Chair, that we have had in our hearings this year.
    So yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you, and I would agree with the ranking 
member. This has been just an outstanding panel and really one 
of the best we have seen all year.
    And I want to say a thank you for joining us, and I think 
the conversation was beyond being important. It was a powerful 
discussion and one that was filled with your own professional 
experience in delineating the very serious issues that we face 
and that the collaboration between mental health providers and 
social services and trained personnel, along with a law 
enforcement community, because I think our society has--not 
unlike we have done with education.
    We loaded up the education system with saying not only are 
you charged with teaching our kids, but you have got to make 
sure that they are safe in schools, and you have got to deal 
with that. You have got to deal with nutrition in schools. And 
in addition to your making sure that they are educated, you 
have all these other social issues that you need to focus on.
    It is the same thing I believe we have done with our law 
enforcement community, with our police departments. You have to 
take on all of this, but we are not in many ways, we are not 
providing the tools that are necessary.
    I think what was so startling here today is the range and 
the number of models around the country, where there are--and 
when I sent out the memo with some background on what is out 
there, the different approaches, you know it is staggering. 
Crisis intervention team model, case management teams, police-
based co-responses, primary co-response teams, secondary co-
response teams, community-based responses, mobile crisis teams, 
peer navigator program, the CAHOOTS program, the STAR program, 
what Arizona has done.
    And I can't just tell you, Dr. Dike, how really proud I am 
of the way that Connecticut and that you laid out where 
Connecticut is involved in these efforts.
    So there are plenty of models, and I think that is what I 
was trying to get to in my last question is how do we work with 
a system where there are best practices, if you will, to deal 
with such an overwhelming crisis that we have? It is a crisis 
in our country.
    And what is so critically important is that the--we hear so 
much today about the lack of communication between communities 
and law enforcement. That is the opposite of what is happening 
here around this country. We have the very close collaboration 
and that what we need to do is to foster that, to be able to 
support the efforts that are ongoing.
    What I am so pleased to say is in terms of these community 
projects funding, which we are engaged in through the 
Appropriations Committee, there are a number of members who are 
requesting support for crisis responses in their own 
communities. That is their--those are their priority that they 
put in for funding.
    And we got some very, very good ideas here. But improving 
the crisis response system, it does make sense, though, when 
you think about it on a dollar and cents issue. Possibly more 
important is the humanitarian imperative that we deal with, and 
that is what this committee is focused on. But when you think 
about cost effectiveness, think about where this could take us. 
We need to be--and we also need to be assured that people are 
treated with dignity and are able to access a healthcare 
system.
    So the recommendations really are there is a consistency 
about it. Just when we talked about the funding for training 
for the kind of police, social workers that the chief talked 
about, this is something that we can look at, which then 
extends the ability of some places who do not have that 
capacity at the moment to have that capacity.
    These co-responder models, the homelessness issue, which I 
think is not a subject in this subcommittee, but we do have a 
committee that focuses on transportation and housing. So the 
recognition of mental health parity, and again, I will talk 
about Medicaid and the expansion of Medicaid and some places 
don't want to do it. But Medicaid is one of the ways in which 
you could afford to have these costs covered.
    I want to just conclude with it feels like we know what 
needs to be done to address the problem. We need, I believe--
and the will is there. I would just say it is not just the 
will, and it is going to be up to us in the Congress. And it is 
going to be up to looking at what the dollar amounts are.
    And the ranking member is correct. We are not going to be 
able to do it. That is why we asked, and he started that line 
of questioning with the chiefs on what are the priorities? And 
we need to be back with you with what are those priorities so 
that when we craft what we are trying to do with the 
appropriation bill, that we are moving in the direction that 
creates--I have become so fond of this phrase--building an 
architecture for the future on where this is going.
    And I think that is so imperative that is what we try to 
do. And thank you all for giving us a roadmap. You have given 
us a roadmap of how to proceed.
    Our own agency that we have funded them, SAMHSA has a 
roadmap. But you have the real clarity on the kinds of efforts 
that we ought to be engaged in, and I am so grateful and thank 
you to all of you for your help here this morning.
    And with that, let me call this hearing to a close. Thank 
you all very, very much. Be safe, take care, and thanks so 
much.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                       [all]