[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MEMBER DAY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
AND WORKFORCE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, NOVEMBER 21, 2025
__________
Serial No. 119-32
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Workforce
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
64-056 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE
TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Chairman
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina Virginia,
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania Ranking Member
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
JAMES COMER, Kentucky MARK TAKANO, California
BURGESS OWENS, Utah ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan MARK DeSAULNIER, California
MARY E. MILLER, Illinois DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana LUCY McBATH, Georgia
KEVIN KILEY, California JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri GREG CASAR, Texas
RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington JOHN W. MANNION, New York
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina ADELITA S. GRIJALVA, Arizona
MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana
RANDY FINE, Florida
R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director
Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on November 21, 2025................................ 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Walberg, Hon. Tim, Chairman, Committee on Education and
Workforce.................................................. 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 2
Scott, Hon. Robert C. ``Bobby'', Ranking Member, Committee on
Education and Workforce.................................... 3
Prepared statement of.................................... 4
WITNESSES
Fine, Hon. Randy, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Florida:................................................ 5
Prepared statement of.................................... 6
Hayes, Hon. Jahana, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Connecticut:...................................... 8
Bonamici, Hon. Suzanne, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon:........................................... 9
Dexter, Hon. Maxine, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon:........................................... 11
Prepared statement of.................................... 12
Hern, Hon. Kevin, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Oklahoma:............................................... 14
Prepared statement of.................................... 16
Mann, Hon. Tracey, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Kansas:........................................... 17
Prepared statement of.................................... 18
Taylor, Hon. David J., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Ohio:............................................. 19
Prepared statement of.................................... 21
ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS
Barr, Hon. Andy, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Kentucky:
Prepared statement of.................................... 25
Lee, Hon. Susie, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Nevada:
Prepared statement of.................................... 25
Takano, Hon. Mark, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California:
Prepared statement of.................................... 27
MEMBER DAY
----------
Friday, November 21, 2025
House of Representatives,
Committee on Education and Workforce,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:02 a.m., in
Room 2261, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Tim Walberg
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Walberg, Taylor, Hern, Mann, Fine,
Scott, Dexter, Bonamici, DeSaulnier, Hayes, and Mannion.
Staff present: Vlad Cerga, Director of Information
Technology; Halle Greenbaum, Staff Assistant; Amy Raaf Jones,
Director of Education And Human Services Policy; Libby Kearns,
Press Assistant; Trey Kovacs, Professional Staff Member;
Campbell Ladd, Clerk; R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director; Danny
Marca, Director of Information Technology; Audra McGeorge,
Communications Director; Ethan Pann, Deputy Press Secretary and
Digital Director; Sara Robertson, Press Secretary; Katherine
Anne Russo, Director of Member Services and Coalitions; Ann
Vogel, Director of Operations; James Whittaker, General
Counsel; Amaris Benavidez, Minority Professional Staff; Ellie
Berenson, Minority Press Assistant; Ilana Brunner, Minority
General Counsel; Ni'Aisha Banks, Minority Staff Assistant;
Phoebe Ball, Minority Senior Counsel; Nikhita Chinmay, Minority
Intern; Bryan Rashage Green, Minority Director of Education
Policy; Lilo Goodmanson, Minority Intern; Natalie Glezen,
Minority Running Start Fellow; Emanual Kimble, Minority
Professional Staff; Scott Estrada, Minority Professional Staff;
Samantha Wilkerson, Minority Professional Staff; Stephanie
Lalle, Minority Communications Director; Jessica Schieder,
Minority Economic Policy Advisor; Andre Lindsay, Minority
Professional Staff; Kwesi Matthews, Minority Einstein Fellow;
Kevin McDermott, Minority Director of Labor Policy; Marie
McGrew, Minority Press Assistant; Eleazar Padilla, Minority
Staff Assistant; Mason Pesek, Minority Labor Policy Counsel;
and Theresa Tilling-Thompson, Minority Professional Staff.
Chairman Walberg. The Committee will please come to order.
A quorum is present.
The Committee meets today pursuant to notice.
Without objection, the chair may recess the Committee at
any point.
Thank you all for being here for this year's Member
hearing. Today is about listening. Today is about listening. I
will say that again. Member Day gives our colleagues who are
not on this Committee a chance to share what is happening back
home, the stories, the ideas, and challenges shaping their
communities. These real-world perspectives help guide our work
as we shape policies that actually meet people where they are
at.
Every district is different, and no one knows its needs
better than the Member who represents it. That is why your
input matters. It keeps this committee grounded in what is
really happening across the country.
I maintain my belief that the Committee on Education and
Workforce is the hardest working committee in Congress. If you
had an opportunity to look at our schedule of hearings this
week, you would agree with us. Far this year, we passed 29
bills and resolutions, held dozens of hearings, led more than
50 oversight letters, and played a pivotal role in the
reconciliation process that saved Americans trillions of
dollars.
In fact, the Working Families Tax Cuts tackle the rising
costs of higher education and student debt by increasing
accountability for colleges and universities and making
education more affordable. The bill also strengthens our
Nation's workforce by increasing access to high-quality job
training courses, programs that prepare students for well-
paying careers without forcing them into baccalaureate degree.
If America is going to lead in the 21st century, it needs to
ensure students have practical skills aligned with high-demand
jobs.
In addition, we have pushed back against the radical
indoctrination happening in schools, protected women's sports,
deterred foreign influence that allowed our enemies to
infiltrate our universities, and combatted the disturbing rise
of antisemitism on our college campuses.
On the workforce side, the committee has advanced
legislation to improve the lives of American workers, reduced
burdens on small businesses, address critical workforce
shortages, and stimulate economic growth. The committee remains
dedicated to advancing pro-growth economic policies that will
unleash the ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit of the
American workforce.
To sum up, from early learning to life-long careers, our
work touches the lives of Americans at every stage of life, and
that is exactly why the ideas shared today are so important.
I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts and working
together to provide students, workers, and job creators with
the opportunity to reach their full potential.
With that, I yield to my friend, the ranking member from
Virginia, Mr. Scott.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Walberg follows:]
Statement of Hon. Tim Walberg, Chairman, Committee on Education and
Workforce
Thank you all for being here for this year's Member Day hearing.
Today is about listening. Member Day gives our colleagues who are
not on the Committee a chance to share what is happening back home--the
stories, ideas, and challenges shaping their communities. These real-
world perspectives help guide our work as we shape policies that
actually meet people where they are.
Every district is different, and no one knows its needs better than
the Member who represents it. That is why your input matters--it keeps
this Committee grounded in what is really happening across the country.
I maintain my belief that the Committee on Education and Workforce
is the hardest working Committee in Congress. So far this year, we
havepassed 29 bills and resolutions, held dozens of hearings, led more
than 50 oversight letters, and played a pivotal role in the
reconciliation process that saved Americans trillions.
In fact, the Working Families Tax Cuts tackle the rising costs of
higher education and student debt by increasing accountability for
colleges and making education more affordable. The bill also
strengthens our nation's workforce by increasing access to high-quality
job training programs that prepare students for well-paying careers
without forcing them into a baccalaureate degree. If America is going
to lead in the 21st century, it needs to ensure students have practical
skills aligned with high-demand jobs.
In addition, we have pushed back against the radical indoctrination
happening in schools, protected women's sports, deterred foreign
influence that allowed our enemies to infiltrate our universities, and
combated the disturbing rise of antisemitism on our college campuses.
On the workforce side, the Committee has advanced legislation to
improve the lives of American workers, reduce burdens on small
businesses, address critical workforce shortages, and stimulate
economic growth. The Biden-Harris administration's radical regulatory
agenda coupled with its reckless spending spree, left American families
and businesses rocked by record-high inflation. Workers saw their
standard of living decline as inflation outpaced average wage growth.
Many of the challenges from the last four years remain.
The Committee is dedicated to advancing pro-growth economic
policies that will unleash the ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit of
the American workforce. To sum up, from early learning to lifelong
careers, our work touches the lives of Americans at every stage of
life. That is exactly why the ideas shared today are so important.
I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts and working together
to provide students, workers, and job creators with the opportunities
to reach their full potential.
______
Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Today, the committee is gathered to hear from Members of
Congress about their priorities for improving programs within
our committee's jurisdiction. The committee Democrats believe
that we should focus on creating a country where everyone earns
a living wage in a safe workplace free from discrimination; a
country where all children, regardless of background, can
access the quality public education; a country where families
do not fear that a trip to a doctor's office will be a trip to
bankruptcy.
Simply put, committee Democrats want to build an economy
that works for everyone not just the wealthy or well connected.
To that end, Democrats are ready to advance legislation that
achieves these very goals. For example, so far this year, we
have introduced the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, which
protects workers' rights to organize and bargain for higher
wages, better benefits, and safer workplaces; Raise the Wage
Act, which gradually raises the minimum wage to $17 an hour;
the Lowering Obstacles to Achievement Now, the LOAN Act, to
lower the cost of college for current and future student
borrowers and their families; the Childcare for Working
Families Act, to comprehensively tackle the childcare crisis
and ensure families across America can find and afford high-
quality childcare; the Lowering Drug Costs for American
Families Act, to lower prescriptive drug prices for families
and rein in pharmaceutical price gouging; and the Equity and
Inclusion Enforcement Act, to hold federally funded programs,
including schools, accountable for providing students with
equal access to education by restoring the private right of
action for students and parents to bring disparate impact
discrimination claims under title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
Democrats also are ready to reclaim our Article I
responsibility and finally hold the Trump administration
accountable for brazenly flouting the law and dismantling
agencies within our committee's jurisdiction without legal
authority. In particular, the mass transfer of education
programs is not only extremely inefficient and wasteful, it
will result in inconsistent enforcement of Federal education
and civil rights policy.
It is my hope that Republicans have returned from their 2-
month taxpayer funded vacation both rested and ready to work.
I want to thank the Members for being with us and welcome
your input and look forward to working together to ensure
America is a country where everyone can succeed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Ranking Member Scott follows:]
Statement of Hon. Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, Ranking Member, Committee
on Education and Workforce
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Today, the Committee is gathered to hear from Members of Congress
about their priorities for improving programs within our Committee's
jurisdiction.
Committee Democrats believe we should focus on creating a country
where everyone earns a living wage in a safe workplace free from
discrimination. A country where all children, regardless of their
background, can access a quality public education. A country where
families do not fear that a trip to the doctor's office will bankrupt
them. Simply put: Committee Democrats want to build an economy that
works for everyone--not just the wealthy or well-connected.
To that end, Democrats are ready to advance legislation that
achieves these very goals. For example, so far this year we have
introduced:
The Protecting the Right to Organize Act which protects
workers' right to organize and bargain for higher wages, better
benefits, and safer workplaces.
The Raise the Wage Act which gradually raise the federal
minimum wage to $17.
The Lowering Obstacles to Achievement Now (LOAN) Act to
lower the cost of college for current and future student borrowers and
their families.
The Child Care for Working Families Act to comprehensively
tackle the child care crisis and ensure families across America can
find and afford the high-quality child care.
The Lowering Drug Costs for American Families Act to lower
prescription drug prices for families and reins in pharmaceutical price
gouging.
The Equity and Inclusion Enforcement Act to hold federally
funded programs, including schools, accountable for providing students
with equal access to education by restoring the private right of action
for students and parents to bring disparate impact discrimination
claims under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
Democrats are also ready to reclaim our Article I responsibility
and finally hold the Trump Administration accountable for brazenly
flouting the law and dismantling the agencies within our Committee's
jurisdiction without legal authority. In particular, the mass transfer
of education programs is not only extremely inefficient and wasteful,
but it will also result in inconsistent enforcement of federal
education and civil rights policy.
It is my hope Republicans have returned from their two-month
taxpayer-funded vacation, both rested and ready to work.
I want to thank the Members for being with us. We welcome your
input and look forward to working together to ensure that America is a
country where everyone can succeed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
______
Chairman Walberg. I thank the gentleman.
Pursuant to committee rule 8(c), all Members who wish to
insert written statements into the record may do so by
submitting them to the committee clerk electronically in
Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m., 14 days after this hearing.
Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 14
days to allow such statements and other extraneous material
noted during the hearing to be submitted for the official
hearing record.
Members today will have 5 minutes to discuss their
education and workforce priorities. I remind those Members that
they will also be able to submit written testimony in support
of their legislation.
First, I will recognize on-committee Members who would like
to briefly testify.
The gentleman from Florida, do you wish to be recognized?
Mr. Fine. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Walberg. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. RANDY FINE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Mr. Fine. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
having this hearing today. I really appreciate it.
I am going to start by thanking you for all of the work
that you have done to fight antisemitism, which is the subject
of the bill that I am going to talk about today. This committee
has done an extraordinary job making that a priority, bringing
in bad actors, and highlighting their failure to protect their
students. I think the question now before us is, how do we pass
legislation that will actually solve the problem as opposed to
simply highlighting the problem?
I want to tell you my story, and I want to tell you how we
solved it in Florida, and then I want to talk about the bill
that I am hoping that we can eventually hear. I grew up a
victim of antisemitism. I went to public school in Lexington,
Kentucky. When I was in seventh grade, I failed algebra. I came
home with my midterm. I could not understand it. I had gotten a
great grade on all the tests. Why did I get an F?
I went to the school, and I met with the teacher, and he
said, ``Well, you got a zero on a test.'' I said, ``Why did I
get a zero?'' I said, ``Wait, that test was given on Yom
Kippur. Can I make it up?'' He goes, ``No, that is an unexcused
absence.'' He said, ``If this was a real holiday, everyone
would have it off.'' I got angry. It is the only time I have
ever seen my dad yell at someone, but the teacher would not
relent. I put my head down, I did not miss a point for the rest
of the year, and I ended up getting an A in the class.
That was just the least of the antisemitism that I faced as
a kid. I faced physical antisemitism. I made a promise that my
children would not face the kinds of challenges that I had when
they grew up. It is a promise I have failed to keep. It is one
that I have worked hard on. I have kept that promise in
Florida.
When I was in the Florida legislature, I introduced a bill
to deal with antisemitism in K through 20, so not only K
through 12, but in higher education. The bill had a very simple
premise. Every time I wanted to deal with antisemitism, I kept
being told freedom of speech, freedom of speech, freedom of
speech, people should be able to say these things; people
should be able to behave in this manner.
I said, okay, I hear you. If a student refers to a student
at one of our universities by the ``N'' word, no one talks
about freedom of speech. They invite them to go and get an
education elsewhere. By the way, that is how it ought to be. If
the Ku Klux Klan wants to show up and burn a cross on the
college green, no one talks about freedom of speech. They go,
``You can't do it,'' and that is how it should be.
When it came to antisemitism I constantly got this ``free
speech, free speech, free speech'' thing. I came up with a
novel way to solve the problem. I said, let us define
antisemitism--what is it?--and then let us not tell educational
institutions how they have to deal with it. We are not going to
tell them what to do. We are just going to say they have to
treat antisemitism the same exact way they deal with racism,
where we have 60 years of case law and institutional practice
in dealing with this horrible thing: racism.
In 2019, we passed this law. It is actually the first bill
in the history of the State of Florida to be signed outside of
the State of Florida. The bill was signed in Israel by myself
and the Governor. In the 6 years that that bill has been in
place in Florida, the problem has gone away. The bill has never
been challenged in court because it is lock solid. Even if it
was, if the bill were to ever be overturned in court, it would
mean that all of the protections that we have done for 60 years
dealing with racism would also be unconstitutional.
The bill has never been challenged, been used hundreds and
hundreds of times. That is why, when at Florida State
University a student, seeing another student wearing an IDF T-
shirt, went up and assaulted them, slapped the camera out of
their face--if that happened at Columbia, they would have given
an award. Well, at Florida State University, the student was
suspended in 15 minutes, ultimately expelled, charged with
assault, and sent to jail. In Florida, we do not put up with
that.
I filed H.R. 6186, which would basically take that bill,
which has solved this problem in Florida, and bring it to the
other 49 States. I can tell you, as I look at the flood of Jews
making what I call ``little Aliyah,'' when they move to
Florida, because they want to be safe, they want to go to
universities in Florida; they want to go to K through 12
education in Florida; there is no reason Florida should be the
only place to do this.
I bring this forward because, A, I know that it works,
because it has worked; and B, I know that it is constitutional
because it has been in place for 6 years. As we move forward
and we continue under your extraordinary leadership to solve
the problem, I hope that this is something that we can take a
look at bringing forward to not just highlight the bad actors
but to actually go after them and solve the problems.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this today. Thank you
for letting me speak, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Representative Fine follows:]
Statement of the Hon. Randy Fine, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Florida
Chairman Walberg, thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
Just half a year ago I served in the Florida House of
Representatives. I never in my wildest imagination would have thought I
would be an America's newest Jewish Republican Congressman, but God has
the plan for us all.
I grew up the victim of rampant systemic physical antisemitism,
where it was not safe for me to eat in the cafeteria, with the other
students. Where the brave school principal saved my life by letting me
hide in his office when I needed to--facing violence 12-years-old never
should have to.
On the day of my Bar Mitzva, I promise I would do anything that I
could to make sure my children did not face what I did. For my eight
years in the Florida Legislature, I worked hard to deliver that promise
to make Florida to be safest place in America to be Jewish.
In my state, people gave me the name Hebrew Hammer. It was not
something I chose for myself. I wear it with pride, because it was
earned over years of standing up for Jewish students and families when
others stayed silent. For years, I fought against the rising hate, even
as that fight brought threats not only to me, but to my wife and my
children.
Florida was the first state to adapt IHRA definition of
antisemitism, to name CAIR a terrorist organization, to ensure Jewish
day schools have adequate security and to make sure terrorist
encampments could never took hold of Florida Universities. Every one of
those was my bill.
I share this because antisemitism has touched the people I
represent and the people I love--and because of that, my fight against
antisemitism will not end. Not now. Not ever.
Today, we are witnessing an explosion of antisemitism in America
unlike anything we have seen in our lifetimes. Nowhere is it more
visible, and more dangerous, than on the college campuses.
Jewish students do not feel safe. I wear the kippa now--something I
did not do before. It is a new habit of mine at my son's request
because of all the students who do not feel protected wearing theirs.
We need to face the hard truth. What we are witnessing is not mere
political disagreement. It is calculated targeted hostility.
It is Jewish students being hunted across campuses: followed,
threatened, blocked from buildings, shouted down, excluded from student
life, physically attacked and assaulted. We have watched Jewish
students barricade themselves inside libraries for safety. We have
watched mobs gather outside dormitory doors. We have heard chants that
openly call for violence against Jews.
At far too many institutions, the response has been inadequate,
inconsistent, or entirely absent. That is why I am here today to ask
you to consider my bill--legislation modeled directly on the law I
passed in Florida, a law that is already protecting students every day.
My bill is simple and straightforward; it does two things:
First: It adopts the IHRA definition of antisemitism. The IHRA
definition is the international gold standard used by the U.S. State
Department, every major Jewish organization, and democratic nations.
Without a definition, you cannot enforce the law. You cannot track
hate. You cannot stop it. The IHRA definition makes things clear. It
shows exactly what antisemitism is and stops schools from pretending
they do not understand it.
The second thing my bill does is it directs institutions to treat
antisemitism the same way they treat racism; that matters.
For years, universities have built vast bureaucracies to police
every form of bigotry, except the one Jews actually face. If a student
were targeted for their race or gender, we know exactly how a
university would react.
When the victim is Jewish, we suddenly get committees, task forces,
statements, and more often--absolutely nothing. My bill ends that
double standard. If you target a student because they are Jewish, it
will be treated the same way as if you targeted them because they are
Black or Hispanic or Asian.
In Florida, we passed this law with overwhelming bipartisan
support, and we have seen immediate impact:
Universities updated their codes of conduct.
Administrators know exactly what qualifies as
antisemitism.
Jewish students have a mechanism to report hate that will
actually be acted on.
Incidents that were previously ignored are now taken
seriously, investigated, and addressed.
Higher education institutions have a responsibility to protect
every student. Right now, too many are failing Jewish students. That
needs to be stopped. No student in America should have to choose
between getting an education and being safe because of who they are.
Not one.
If the universities do not fix this themselves--then we in Congress
have a responsibility to act. I passed this law in Florida because
Jewish students were being targeted and no one was doing enough. Today,
Jewish students across the country are facing the same threat.
I have a bill that works. Florida proves it. We see clarity,
accountability, and safety. It is time to extend it nationwide.
I am preparing to introduce this legislation, and once it is filed,
I am ready to work with you and every Member to bring it across the
finish line.
______
Chairman Walberg. I thank the gentleman for sharing those
ideas and case history with us as well.
Are there any other Members who wish to be recognized?
I recognize Representative Hayes for her 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JAHANA HAYES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. Good morning. I appreciate the
opportunity to come before the committee today to talk about
what I find as my priorities for myself and the constituents
that I represent.
It is very simple: This committee needs to reassert our
Article I and jurisdictional authorities over the areas that we
cover, in particular, the dismantling of the Department of
Education. The committee has had no hearings to conduct
oversight on the efforts led by the Trump administration to
dismantle the Department of Education. The Department was
created by Congress and only can be abolished by an act of
Congress. No matter what your opinion is on this matter, this
committee should be having hearings to discuss what is
happening.
On March 20, President Trump signed an executive order to
close the Department of Education, and most recently, on
November 18, several agreements were signed to disperse the
authorities. This administration has used interagency
agreements to evade Congress and transfer day-to-day operations
of congressionally mandated programs to other Federal agencies.
The most significant actions taken so far were this week.
On Tuesday, the administration announced it signed six new
agreements with the Departments of Labor, Interior, Health and
Human Services, and States to manage various education
functions and, quote, ``break up the Federal education
bureaucracy.'' We should have the heads of all of those
Departments before this committee to explain what that looks
like and the impact it will have on students, to make sure that
this transition does not negatively impact students, rural
communities, low-income students, students with disabilities,
and the populations that rely most heavily on public education.
What do these changes mean to them?
The Office of Civil Rights had mass layoffs this year. The
Department's own data shows that there has been a decline in
resolving civil rights cases, while new complaints have
increased. This committee should be holding hearings on that.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act specifically says
that the Department of Education is the home of 21st Century
Community Learning Centers. This committee should be having
hearings on that.
ICE agents are showing up at schools scaring immigrant
children. This committee should be having hearings on that.
Parents, teachers, administrators, community leaders are
uncertain about what this means, and this committee needs to
reassert our jurisdictional and congressional authority so that
we can get answers. The public demands answers.
While Secretary McMahon is creating a public campaign to
show how no impact happened during the government shutdown--I
mentioned this in committee the other day--our military
schools, which are where 67,000 students are educated, canceled
extracurricular activities; teachers were not paid; students
risked losing scholarships. There was disruption. This
committee should be having hearings on that.
The second thing I would like to address before my time is
over is that I still have not received a response to my
September 12th letter to this committee requesting a hearing
specifically on school shootings. As the chair said, everybody
should deal with the priorities of their district. Well, I
represent Newtown-Sandy Hook, and on December 14, 2012, I was
in the classroom. It is unconscionable that this committee
cannot even have a hearing on that when we have seen a rise in
school shootings over this year. This includes multifaceted
interventions that include mental health support, community
engagement, gun safety measures, and educational programs. We
should be discussing ways to address this crisis.
This week, in my State, the Sandy Hook Promise, the
Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public
Protections, and the Connecticut School Districts recently
celebrated the culmination of 7 years of collaboration to
improve school safety through grants. We are doing the work in
Connecticut to make sure that this does not happen in our State
again. This committee should be having hearings to make sure
that this does not happen anywhere in this country.
The grants that we have provided supported a wide range of
district and youth-led initiatives in Connecticut schools to
deliver a holistic set of violence prevention programs,
including peer-led interventions to educational programs and
self-harm reductions. These lifesaving programs have helped
prevent at least 20 potential youth suicides and support over
50 mental health interventions.
We could also talk about ways to improve the physical
infrastructure of schools to attempt to prevent school
shootings. Either way, this committee should be holding
hearings on that.
We have heard the rundown of all the hearings that we have
had over this year and, in some cases, multiple hearings on the
same topics; yet we have had zero hearings on school safety and
prevention when it comes to school shootings or the dismantling
of the Department of Education. I encourage the chair, as we
are moving forward through the rest of the year and the
calendar is being built out, that these topics be discussed.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman Walberg. I thank the gentlelady from Connecticut,
and your comments are duly noted.
I recognize now the gentleman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici,
for your 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. SUZANNE BONAMICI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to start by aligning myself with every comment made
by Representative Hayes, our national teacher of the year, who
serves on the committee. We all have a lot to learn from her.
I recognize it is unusual for a committee member to use a
Member Day to elevate their priorities. Unfortunately, these
are not normal times, Mr. Chairman.
On Tuesday, the Department of Education announced six new
interagency agreements that they are using to try to move
critical educational programs and services to the Department of
Health and Human Services, the Department of the Interior, the
Department of Labor, and the State Department. This follows the
interagency agreement earlier this year to move the
administration of career and technical education and adult
education out of the Department of Education.
This plan is from Project 2025's radical and destructive
agenda to dismantle and eliminate the Department of Education,
which is illegal and unconstitutional. It is an act of Congress
that created the Department of Education, and only an act of
Congress could dismantle it.
Far from their stated goal of empowering parents and
States, these interagency agreements create additional hurdles
for educators, for staff, for families. Instead of reporting to
and receiving funds from only one Federal agency, now States
and schools must navigate working with as many as five
different agencies.
I truly do not understand why my Republican colleagues are
arguing that it is somehow better for students and schools to
scatter the programs and funding streams that support them
across multiple agencies, all of which have different systems
and procedures and typically do not have staff with the
relevant expertise.
I am always looking for smarter, better ways to do things,
but this plan is neither smart nor better. It does not
streamline Federal bureaucracy. It complicates it. I want to
emphasize that it is clear that the administration cannot
legally close the Department without congressional action, and
moving everything out of other agencies is the equivalent of
closing the Department. The executive branch does not have that
power, and we certainly should not give up ours under Article I
of the Constitution.
Mr. Chairman, this should have been done prior to these
interagency agreements, but I urge the committee to immediately
hold hearings about these actions so we can understand the
effects these interagency agreements will have on students,
families, educators, and staff. We must bring Secretary McMahon
before the committee to answer our questions about this
unlawful restructuring of a congressionally authorized agency.
Anything else would be a dereliction of our duty as lawmakers.
There is a lot at stake here. What message does it send
around the country and the world that the United States is
dismantling its Department of Education? Not a good one. We
must address the illegal and unconstitutional effort to close
the Department. The sooner the better, before more damage is
done.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Chairman Walberg. I thank the gentlelady, and she yields.
Are there any others that seek to be recognized on the
committee?
Well, thank you to each of you who are here. I would make
note as well that senior staff of the committee on both sides
of the aisle are here and are taking copious notes. I can see
that happening. This certainly is a legitimate hearing to hear
your ideas and concerns, and decisions will be made as we move
forward.
Committee Members are certainly welcome to remain on the
dais, but I remind committee Members that it is customary, in
this committee, not to ask witnesses questions during Member
Day hearings but to take in all that we can from your comments.
Now, we will give the turn to the panel. I will first
recognize Representative Dexter for your testimony. Thank you
for being here.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. MAXINE DEXTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
Ms. Dexter. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Vice--or,
I am sorry, Ranking Member Scott--it is--old State habits break
hard--and Members of the Education and Workforce Committee.
I appreciate the opportunity to participate in Member Day
hearing and discuss priorities where I believe there is a real
opportunity for bipartisan partnership to better serve working
families.
I am Maxine Dexter. I am a mother, a physician, and a very
proud representative for Oregon's Third congressional District.
I am also humbled to be an American Dream realized. I grew up
in a working-class family where we only knew that you had to
work hard and play by the rules, and we found opportunity. I am
only able to sit here before you today because of the
investments our government made to make my life possible.
I am the first and only person--even today, nieces,
nephews--to graduate from college. The idea that I could 1 day
become a doctor was a dream that grit, hard work, and
government made possible. Our country invested in me and people
like me. I had access to well-funded public schools, safe
neighborhoods, reliable transit, a union job, and affordable
rent. It is painful to say, but opportunity is much less
plentiful today.
As a mother and a Representative, I see that, for my kids'
generation, the American Dream, it is just out of reach. I came
to Congress to fix that. Where do we start? For one, we truly
center working families. We cannot do what is needed to help
them just getting by. We need them to have the opportunity to
thrive. They deserve economic stability, a foundation to
succeed from, and people living paycheck to paycheck cannot
make that work. We have to do better.
I look at you, this committee, with a hope that you will
partner in making the American Dream once again possible. Here
are a few of my legislative ideas that I hope you will consider
and even decide to champion with me.
First, I am developing legislation modeled after an
incredible multigenerational housing community in my district
called Bridge Meadows. Bridge Meadows offers affordable homes
to seniors, foster youth, and their families. It is not just
housing. Bridge Meadows builds a community with wraparound
social services, tutoring, and it enriches the lives of those
children who have been left behind, and those impacted by both
foster care and elders who embrace them and cultivate a future
with them.
The Intergenerational Community Housing Act would create a
pilot to scale this model nationally and gather evidence on the
importance of having stable, affordable--and community.
Second, the Healthy and Housed Older Adults Act, which
confronts senior houselessness, head on. Senior homelessness is
rising at an alarming rate, often driven by fixed incomes,
unaffordable rents, and unaddressed health needs. My proposal
would create a grant program dedicated to bolstering
coordination between local homelessness Continuums of Care and
Area Agencies on Aging. This would support coordinated housing,
medical care, case management, and aging services for our
elders.
Another bill, the College Success Through Stable Housing
Act, is a pilot program to provide stable, affordable housing
and supportive services for college students experiencing
homelessness. Affordable rent was foundational to my success in
college and medical school. Every student deserves the same. My
goal is to ensure every family has the ability to live a
healthy and safe life in the community of their choice.
As the only pulmonologist ever serving in Congress, I have
cared for patients struggling to breathe throughout my career.
I have seen firsthand how smoke, dust, and pollution ravage our
lungs and steal years from people's lives. No child should sit
in a classroom filled with hazardous air, and no worker should
have to choose between a paycheck and their health. That is why
I introduced this Shielding Students from Wildfire Smoke Act,
meant to strengthen national understanding on how to protect
children and teachers' health during wildfire smoke events.
I also introduced the Farmworker Smoke and Excessive Heat
Protection Act to ensure basic safeguards for the farm workers
in our community. I am grateful that many on this committee are
engaged in these efforts.
Finally, I want to associate myself with the written
testimony submitted by Congressman Morgan McGarvey about the
importance of protecting our communities against black lung and
silicosis. These are horrible, preventable diseases that lead
to higher rates of tuberculosis, cancer, disability, and death.
I would add that we must also consider occupational
presumptions for conditions like black lung and silicosis with
a commitment to robust research and development of preventative
tools so that high-risk occupations become safer.
I encourage the committee to consider just a few, even
more, of these issues. Thank you all for being here today and
for your commitment to supporting our working families. Thank
you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Representative Dexter follows:]
Statement of the Hon. Maxine Dexter, a Representative in Congress From
the State of Oregon
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Education and Workforce
Committee.
I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this Member Day
hearing and discuss priorities where I believe there is a real
opportunity for bipartisan partnership to better serve working
families.
I am Maxine Dexter. I am mother, a physician, and the proud U.S.
Representative for Oregon's Third Congressional District.
I am also a product of the American Dream. I grew up in a working-
class family, and I was the first in my family to graduate from
college.
I left home at seventeen and achieved what once felt impossible for
a kid like me: I became a physician.
That was only possible because this country invested in me. I had
access to well-funded public schools, safe neighborhoods, strong
transit, a union job, and affordable rent.
It is because of the resources and opportunities this country
afforded me that I was able to create a better life for myself than my
parents had.
It is painful to say, but the same is not true for our kids today.
As a mother, I see that for my kids' generation, the American Dream
is increasingly out of reach.
I came to Congress to fix that.
Where do we start? For one, it means centering working families.
That means advancing policies that give working families the support
they need to do more than just get by--but to thrive.
The foundation of a thriving middle class, when you boil it down,
is making sure everyone in this country has a stable, supportive place
to call home.
I hope this committee will partner with me in making that promise
real.
I am developing legislation modeled after an incredible
multigenerational housing community in my district called Bridge
Meadows.
Bridge Meadows offers affordable homes to seniors, foster youth,
and their families.
It is not just housing; Bridge Meadows builds a community with
wrap-around social services that enriches the well-being of children
and youth impacted by fostercare and elders.
My Intergenerational Community Housing Act would create a pilot to
scale this model nationally and gather evidence on the importance of
stable, affordable, housing community.
Likewise, I am developing legislation, the Healthy and Housed Older
Adults Act, which confronts senior houselessness head on. Senior
homelessness is rising at an alarming rate, often driven by fixed
incomes, unaffordable rents, and unaddressed health needs.
My proposal would create a grant program dedicated to bolstering
coordination between local homelessness Continuums of Care and Area
Agencies on Aging. This would support coordinated housing, medical
care, case management, and aging services for our seniors.
I am also developing the College Success through Stable Housing
Act, a pilot program to provide stable, affordable housing and
supportive services for college students experiencing homelessness.
Affordable rent made gave me the opportunity to succeed in college
and medical school. I want every student to have the same chance.
These are just a number of my priorities. The bottom line is that
giving working families the stability they need to thrive must be our
mission.
It must be the mission of not just this committee, not just of this
Congress, but of the federal government in perpetuity.
Our country has never been perfect. Our history has always been a
zigzag, a constant push and pull between our highest ideals and our
deepest flaws.
We have confronted slavery, segregation, exploitation,
discrimination, and every time we face those truths rather than bury
them, we grow stronger.
Now, we must confront the reality that the federal government has
fallen short in its commitment to the working class.
It is not too late to choose a different path. We can choose to
build a country where every child believes the American Dream belongs
to them too.
In addition to housing, I am committed to making sure the places we
live, work, learn, and play have clean, safe air.
As a pulmonologist, I cared for patients struggling to breathe and
I have seen firsthand how smoke and pollution ravage our lungs and
steal years of healthy life.
No child should sit in a classroom filled with hazardous air, and
no worker should have to choose between a paycheck and their lungs.
That is why I introduced the Shielding Students from Wildfire Smoke
Act meant to strengthen national understanding on how to protect
children's health during wildfire smoke events.
It is why I introduced the Farmworker Smoke and Excessive Heat
Protection Act to ensure basic safeguards for the workers who keep our
agricultural economy running, many of whom endure the highest exposures
with the fewest protections.
I am grateful that many on this committee are engaged in this
effort.
I want to thank my friend Congressman McGarvey for his leadership
on advancing legislation to improve treatment outcomes and preventive
measures for black lung disease. I encourage the committee to take up
this critical issue.
Thank you, all, for being here today and for your commitment to
supporting working families.
I look forward to working with you.
______
Chairman Walberg. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciated your
time and making these comments.
Now we recognize the gentleman from Oklahoma,
Representative Hern. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. KEVIN HERN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
Mr. Hern. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member,
and distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify today. I am here to highlight an issue
of significant importance to small business owners, workers,
and local economies across the United States: the need for a
clear, permanent joint employer standard for franchise
businesses.
Franchising is a major facilitator of economic growth in
the United States. In 2024 alone, franchises generated
approximately $896 billion in economic output and employed
about 8.8 million workers. More than 831,000 independently
owned small businesses operate under the franchise agreements
across the country.
The franchise business model has long served as a powerful
engine of economic opportunity for Americans from all
backgrounds. According to Oxford Economics, Black-owned
franchises earned 2.2 times more than Black-owned independent
businesses; Hispanic-owned franchises earn 1.6 times more than
Hispanic-owned independent businesses; and Asian-owned
franchises earn 1.4 times more than Asian-owned independent
businesses.
My nearly 30 years as a McDonald's franchisee, including 8
years as chair of the Franchise Relations on the National
Leadership Team, showed me that franchising is one of the
clearest expressions of the American Dream. I have seen
firsthand how essential clear labor standards and transparency
are to ensure this business model continues to thrive.
The franchise model is built on a simple but powerful idea:
allowing entrepreneurs to go into business for themselves but
not by themselves. Local franchise owners invest in their own
capital, hire their own employees, manage the payroll, oversee
every aspect of daily operation. Meanwhile, franchisors provide
branding, operational expertise, and support necessary for
consistency and customer trust. This partnership has created
generations of successful business owners.
This business model and the opportunities it creates is
increasingly threatened by regulatory uncertainty around the
Federal joint employer standard. The joint employer standard
determines when two entities share legal responsibility for
labor law violations based on the degree of control one
exercises over another's employees. For decades, this standard
was straightforward: two employers were jointly liable if one
exercised substantial direct and immediate control over
essential terms of employment.
This changed dramatically in 2015 when the National Labor
Relations Board broadened the definition. The new standard
swept franchisors and franchisees into unnecessary joint
liability, despite franchisees independently hiring and
managing their own workers. The consequences were real and
significant. The 2015 standard cost franchise businesses over
$33 billion annually, eliminated 376,000 job opportunities, and
drastically increased lawsuits against local businesses.
Since 2015, the definition shifted four separate times
creating severe legal and operational uncertainty for small
business owners. In 2024, a Federal court struck down the
NLRB's most expansive joint employer rule, but litigation
continues. The instability erodes trust in regulators,
discourages investment, stifles growth across the franchise
sector.
To provide clarity and stability for millions of workers
and business owners, Congress should adopt the bipartisan,
bicameral American Franchise Act. With more than 40 cosponsors
and strong support from Members on both sides of the aisle,
including on this very committee, the bill reflects a broad,
balanced commitment to strengthening the franchise sector.
The legislation makes targeted modest amendments to the
Fair Labor Standards Act and the National Labor Relations Act
to codify a clear standard. A franchisor may be considered a
joint employer of a franchisee's employees only if the
franchisor possesses and exercises substantial, direct, and
immediate control over one or more essential terms of a
condition of employment.
This standard is consistent with decades of precedent and
current NLRB policy. The bill does not grant immunity to
franchisors. Instead, it ensures that actions like setting
brand standards, protecting trademarks and intellectual
property, or providing training materials cannot be
misconstrued as direct control over a franchisee's workforce.
The legislation applies only to franchisors and to franchisees
under the NLRA and FLSA, not to independent contractors or
other liability doctrines, such as misclassifications or
agency.
In short, the AFA restores balance, preserves the
independence of local business owners, empowers Americans from
all backgrounds, protects a business model that contributes $1
trillion to the United States economy. Franchising offers a
unique entrepreneurial opportunity to minorities and veterans
and all aspiring entrepreneurs with nearly 26 percent minority
ownership rate and 14 percent veteran ownership rate. None
other sector has done more to broaden economy stability and
lift Americans out of poverty, including myself.
Franchise owners are folks who take risks, invest their
savings, and create jobs in their communities. They serve a
stable regulatory framework that allows them to grow with
confidence. Passing the AFA will provide the clarity and
fairness they need to thrive.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Representative Hern follows:]
Statement of the Hon. Kevin Hern, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Oklahoma
Chairman Walberg, Ranking Member Scott, and distinguished members
of the Committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am here to
highlight an issue of significant importance to small business owners,
workers, and local economies across the United States: the need for a
clear, permanent joint employer standard for franchise businesses.
Franchising is a major facilitator of economic growth in the US. In
2024 alone, franchises generated approximately $896 billion in economic
output and employed about 8.8 million workers. More than 831,000
independently owned small businesses operate under franchise agreements
across the country.
The franchise business model has long served as a powerful engine
of economic opportunity for Americans from all backgrounds. According
to Oxford Economics, ``Black-owned franchises earn 2.2 times more than
Black-owned independent businesses; Hispanic-owned franchises earn 1.6
times more than Hispanic-owned independent businesses; and Asian-owned
franchises earn 1.4 times more than Asian-owned independent
businesses.''
My nearly 30 years as a McDonald's franchisee--including eight
years as Chair of Franchise Relations on the National Leadership Team--
showed me that franchising is one of the clearest expressions of the
American Dream. I have seen firsthand how essential clear labor
standards and transparency are to ensure this business model continues
to thrive.
The franchise model is built on a simple but powerful idea:
allowing entrepreneurs to go into business for themselves, but not by
themselves. Local franchise owners invest their own capital, hire their
own employees, manage payroll and oversee every aspect of daily
operations. Meanwhile, franchisors provide branding, operational
expertise, and support necessary for consistency and consumer trust.
This partnership has created generations of successful small business
owners.
This business model--and the opportunities it creates--is
increasingly threatened by regulatory uncertainty around the federal
joint employer standard.The joint employer standard determines when two
entities share legal responsibility for labor law violations based on
the degree of control one exercises over another's employees. For
decades, this standard was straightforward: two employers were jointly
liable only if one exercised substantial, direct, and immediate control
over essential terms of employment.
This changed dramatically in 2015, when the National Labor
Relations Board (NLRB) broadened the definition. The new standard swept
franchisors and franchisees into unnecessary joint liability, despite
franchisees independently hiring and managing their workers.
The consequences were real and significant. The 2015 standard cost
franchise businesses over $33 billion annually, eliminated 376,000 job
opportunities, and drastically increased lawsuits against local
businesses.
Since 2015, the definition has shifted four separate times,
creating severe legal and operational uncertainty for thousands of
small business owners. In 2024, a federal court struck down the NLRB's
most recent expansive joint employer rule--but litigation continues.
This instability erodes trust in regulators, discourages investment,
and stifles growth across the franchise sector.
To provide clarity and stability for millions of workers and
business owners, Congress should adopt the bipartisan, bicameral
American Franchise Act. With more than 40 cosponsors and strong support
from members on both sides of the aisle--including on this very
committee--the bill reflects a broad, balanced commitment to
strengthening the franchise sector.
This legislation makes targeted, modest amendments to the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the National Labor Relations Act to codify a
clear standard:
A franchisor may be considered a joint employer of a franchisee's
employees only if the franchisor possesses and exercises substantial,
direct, and immediate control over one or more essential terms or
conditions of employment. This standard is consistent with decades of
precedent and current NLRB policy.
The bill does not grant immunity to franchisors. Instead, it
ensures:
Actions like setting brand standards, protecting trademarks and
intellectual property, or providing training materials cannot be
misconstrued as direct control over a franchisee's workforce.
The legislation applies only to franchisors and franchisees under
the NLRA and FLSA--not to independent contractors or other liability
doctrines such as misclassification or agency.
In short, the American Franchise Act restores balance, preserves
the independence of local business owners, empowers Americans from all
backgrounds, and protects a business model that contributes nearly a
trillion dollars to the U.S. economy. Franchising offers a unique
entrepreneurial opportunity to minorities, veterans, and all aspiring
entrepreneurs, with nearly a 26-percent minority ownership rate and 14-
percent veteran ownership rate; Also, no other sector has done more to
foster broad-based economic stability and lift Americans out of
poverty, including myself.
Franchise owners are folks who take risks, invest their savings,
and create jobs in their communities. They deserve a stable regulatory
framework that allows them to grow with confidence. Passing the
American Franchise Act will provide the clarity and fairness they need
to thrive.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I yield back.
______
Chairman Walberg. Thank you for taking the opportunity. We
appreciate it.
Mr. Hern. You bet.
Chairman Walberg. Now I recognize the gentleman from
Kansas, Representative Mann. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. TRACEY MANN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS
Mr. Mann. Thank you, Chairman Walberg, Ranking Member
Scott, and Members of this committee, for the opportunity to
speak with you today.
Today I would like to discuss Haskell Indian Nation's
University, located in my district, in Lawrence, Kansas.
Established in 1884 by Federal legislation aimed to fulfill the
United States treaty and trust obligations to provide a high-
quality education to American Indians, Haskell is the only
Tribal university in the world with an entirely indigenous
population. It is a one-of-a-kind historic and invaluable
institution.
However--and let me be clear--when it comes to Haskell, the
U.S. Department of Interior and the Bureau of Indian Education
have dropped the ball. Years of mismanagement, lack of
oversight, cycles of misconduct have all compounded, and
Congress needs to conduct serious oversight.
The students and faculty at Haskell deserve a safe learning
and working environment. I have been encouraged by the House
Education and Workforce Committee and Natural Resources
Committee's oversight efforts over the past few years, and I
hope we will see that continued.
I, along with Senator Jerry Moran, introduced the Haskell
Indian Nation's University Improvement Act, which would
federally charter Haskell and separate them from the governance
of the BIE. The Federal Government has sadly done a disservice
to this school, and one way to make this right is to put the
education of Haskell students back in the hands of Indian
Country.
While the Federal Government will still be obligated to
provide necessary funds to the school, governance would be
transferred to qualified Tribal leaders from across the
country. The legislation would open the door for opportunities
that Haskell is currently not eligible for, the ability to
expand educational programs and provide Native students with a
safe learning environment.
I encourage all of my colleagues to support this
legislation and to reach out to my office should you have any
questions.
I would also like to take time to discuss another piece of
legislation I, along with Representative Joe Neguse,
introduced, called the States Handling Access to Reciprocity
for Employment Act, or the SHARE Act. Hospitals and other
healthcare facilities are experiencing workforce shortages that
are causing considerable strain on our healthcare system. One
way to address this shortage is to expedite licensure processes
for our current providers.
Current law requires healthcare providers to obtain a
license or certification from each State in which they wish to
practice. If a provider licensed in one State relocates to
another, that provider must then complete the licensure process
again for each new State in which they wish to practice. This
process is burdensome and strips providers of the ability to
practice in any new State until the application is approved,
sometimes taking more than half a year.
The SHARE Act would make a technical correction to
modernize a vital component of a licensure process for
healthcare providers by authorizing the FBI to share criminal
history record information between States for licensure
purposes, allowing cooperation between States while protecting
each State's authority to determine whether a provider is
eligible to practice in the State.
This legislation extends the reach of healthcare
professionals, improves access to medical specialists, and
leverages the use of medical technologies like telehealth.
As the committee continues to work on legislation and
oversight surrounding Haskell Indian Nation's University and
our healthcare workforce, I ask that you consider my comments
today are taken into consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you on these
timely and important issues, and I yield back the remainder of
my time.
[The prepared statement of Representative Mann follows:]
Statement of the Hon. Tracey Mann, a Representative in Congress From
the State of Kansas
Thank you, Chairman Walberg, Ranking Member Scott, and Members of
the Committee, for the opportunity to speak with you today.
Today, I would like to discuss Haskell Indian Nation's University,
located in my district in Lawrence, Kansas.
Established in 1884 by federal legislation aimed to fulfil the
United States' treaty and trust obligations to provide a high-quality
education to American Indians, Haskell is the only Tribal university in
the world with an entirely indigenous population. It is a one-of-a-
kind, historic and invaluable institution. However, and let me be
clear--when it comes to Haskell, the U.S. Department of the Interior
and the Bureau of Indian Education have dropped the ball. Years of
mismanagement, lack of oversight, and cycles of misconduct have all
compounded, and Congress needs to conduct serious oversight.
The students and faculty at Haskell deserve a safe learning and
working environment. I have been encouraged by the House Education and
Workforce and Natural Resources Committees' oversight efforts over the
past few years, and hope to see that continued.
I, along with Senator Jerry Moran, introduced the Haskell Indian
Nations University Improvement Act, which would federally charter
Haskell and separate them from the governance of the BIE. The Federal
government has sadly done a disservice to this school, and one way to
make this right is to put the education of Haskell's students back in
the hands of Indian country. While the Federal government will still be
obligated to provide necessary funds to the school, governance would be
transferred to qualified Tribal leaders from across the country. This
legislation would open the door for opportunities that Haskell is
currently not eligible for, the ability to expand educational programs,
and provide Native students with a safe learning environment.
I encourage all of my colleagues to support this legislation, and
to reach out to my office should you have any questions.
I would also like to take the time to discuss another piece of
legislation I, along with Representative Joe Neguse, introduced called
the States Handling Access to Reciprocity for Employment Act, or the
SHARE Act.
Hospitals and other health care facilities are experiencing
workforce shortages that are causing a considerable strain on our
health care system. One way to address this shortage is to expedite
licensure processes for our current providers.
Current law requires health care providers to obtain a license or
certification from each state in which they wish to practice. If a
provider licensed in one state relocates to another, that provider must
complete the licensure process again for each new state in which they
wish to practice. This process is burdensome and strips providers of
the ability to practice in any new state until the application is
approved--sometimes taking more than half a year.
The SHARE Act would make a technical correction to modernize a
vital component of the licensure process for health care providers by
authorizing the FBI to share criminal history record information
between states for licensure purposes, allowing cooperation between
states while protecting each states' authority to determine whether a
provider is eligible to practice in the state.
This legislation extends the reach of health care professionals,
improves access to medical specialists, and leverages the use of
medical technologies like telehealth.
As the Committee continues to work on legislation and oversight
surrounding Haskell Indian Nations University or our healthcare
workforce, I ask that you ensure my comments todayare taken into
consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak on these timely and
important issues, and I yield back the remainder of my time.
______
Chairman Walberg. I thank the gentleman, and your message
is well heard.
Now I recognize the----
Mr. Taylor. Ohio. It is okay, I am new here.
Chairman Walberg [continuing]. The gentleman from Ohio--go
Blue--for his 5 minutes of testimony. Representative Taylor,
you are welcome.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. DAVID J. TAYLOR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member,
for having me here today. Thank you for the Members that joined
us today as well, and thank you for all the hard work you do.
I hail from Ohio's Second congressional District, which
stretches across the entirety of southern Ohio, from the
Cincinnati suburbs to Ohio's border with West Virginia. My
district is in the core of Appalachia and is ground zero for
many of the issues facing rural America, from the lack of
broadband to the shortage of childcare, as well as jobs and
skilled workers.
While there are many issues my constituents are concerned
about facing, above all, they are concerned about their
children's future and the opportunities that they will have to
move up in the world. These are valid concerns, especially as
the communities I represent have largely been left behind and
neglected by the Federal Government.
Over the last 40 years, many towns in southern Ohio saw
power plants and factories close, jobs shipped overseas, and
economic growth shift to the urban centers and the coast.
Fortunately, thanks to the hard work of countless community
leaders, southern Ohio is starting to make a great comeback,
and there are similar encouraging stories across America.
However, there is more work to be done, and much of the
important work Congress will do will take place right here in
the Education and Workforce Committee. The policies crafted by
the committee have the potential to accelerate economic growth,
improve educational outcomes, and help prepare our young people
for good-paying jobs right out of school.
As a third-generation small business owner, I understand
the value of having a skilled workforce. To that end, I am
proud that we passed the critical workforce Pell provision in
the Working Families Tax Cut, which allows Pell grants to be
used to gain workforce credentials through short-term career
training programs. These kinds of creative solutions are key to
addressing the skilled labor shortage, which, if not addressed,
will leave us with a shortage of electricians, carpenters,
plumbers, HVAC technicians, and many other essential workers.
Luckily, community organizations across America are
stepping up to fill this gap and help train a skilled
workforce. In my district, United Steel Workers Local 689 has
partnered with the Department of Energy to train individuals on
plant safety and inspection. The University of Rio Grande has
partnered with Ohio Means Jobs to offer programming for in-
demand jobs outside the traditional 4-year pathway. Growing
Rural Independence Together Project partners with countless
organizations across southern Ohio to provide career services.
I know I speak for everyone across Ohio's Second
congressional District when I say that we are grateful for the
work they do in helping people develop a skill and finding
meaning in their work. While organizations in my district are
grateful for the Federal funds they receive, I have heard from
some of them that the requirements attached to these Federal
funds are too restrictive, resulting in fewer individuals being
served.
That is exactly why I am introducing the Workforce
Flexibility Act in the coming weeks. This bill, supported by
numerous workforce organizations and stakeholders, would help
provide flexibility to our local organizations as they seek to
train the next generation. In one WIOA district that covers
three counties in southern Ohio, they had to turn away more
than 300 people from their training program due to the lack of
flexibility under Title I of WIOA.
This is extremely disheartening as every business I visit
needs workers, and fewer people are getting involved in skilled
trades. There are many organizations that would benefit from
more flexibility. In the end, the real beneficiaries will be
the young people this flexibility will put on track to
achieving the American Dream, a job they can be proud of and
which allows them to own a home and raise a family.
As the committee continues to evaluate legislation in this
Congress and work on the WIOA reauthorization, I look forward
to working with you to embrace more local flexibility so we can
fast-track workforce development and revitalize towns and
cities across America. The changes in my bill could get more
people trained, grow our workforce in rural America, and
resurrect our small towns as we bring manufacturing back to the
United States.
I want to thank the committee again for the opportunity to
speak here today, and I appreciate the work you do on these
pressing issues. I respectfully urge you to include my
Workforce Flexibility Act in the WIOA reauthorization, and I
look forward to continuing to work with you to usher in
America's golden age.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Representative Taylor follows:]
Statement of the Hon. David J. Taylor, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Ohio
Thank you, Chairman Walberg, and Ranking Member Scott, for giving
me the opportunity to speak here today and thank you for all the hard
work you do.
I hail from Ohio's Second Congressional District, which stretches
across the entirety of southern Ohio, from the Cincinnati suburbs to
Ohio's border with West Virginia.
My district is in the core of Appalachia and is ground zero for
many of the issues facing rural America--from the lack of broadband to
the shortage of childcare as well as jobs and skilled workers.
While there are many issues my constituents are concerned about
facing, above all, they are concerned about their children's future and
the opportunities they will have to move up in the world. These are
valid concerns, especially as the communities I represent have largely
been left behind and neglected by the federalgovernment.
Over the last forty years, many towns in southern Ohio saw power
plants and factories close, jobs shipped overseas, and economic growth
shift to the urban centers and the coasts.
Fortunately, thanks to the hard work of countless community
leaders, southern Ohio is starting to make a great comeback, and there
are similar encouraging stories across America. However, there is more
work to be done, and much of the important work Congress will do will
take place right here in the Education and Workforce Committee.
The policies crafted by this committee have the potential to
accelerate economic development, improve educational outcomes, and help
prepare our young people for good-paying jobs right out of school. As a
third-generation small business owner, I understand the value of having
a skilled workforce.
To that end, I am proud that we passed a critical Workforce Pell
provision in the Working Families Tax Cut, which allows Pell Grants to
be used to gain workforce credentials through short-term career
training programs.
These kinds of creative solutions are key to addressing the skilled
labor shortage, which if not addressed, will leave us with a shortage
of:
Electricians
Carpenters
Plumbers
HVAC technicians and many other essential workers.
Luckily, community organizations across America are stepping up to
fill this gap and help train a skilled workforce.
In my district, United Steel Workers Local 689 has partnered with
the Department of Energy to train individuals on plant safety and
inspection.
The University of Rio Grande has partnered with Ohio Means Jobs to
offer programming for in-demand jobs outside of the traditional 4-year
pathway. The Growing Rural Independence Together Project partners with
countless organizations across southern Ohio to provide career
services. I know I speak for everyone across Ohio's Second
Congressional District when I say that we are grateful for the work
they do in helping people develop a skill and find meaning in their
work.
While organizations in my district are grateful for the federal
funds they receive, I have heard from them that the requirements
attached to these federal funds are too restrictive, resulting in fewer
individuals being served.
That is exactly why I'm introducing the Workforce Flexibility Act
in the coming weeks.
This bill, supported by numerous workforce organizations and
stakeholders, would help provide flexibility to our local organizations
as they seek to train the next generation. In one WIOA district that
covers three counties in southern Ohio, they had to turn away more than
three hundred people from theirtraining program due to the lack of
flexibility under Title I of WIOA. This is extremely disheartening as
every business I visit needs workers, and fewer people are getting
involved in skilled trades.
There are many organizations that would benefit from more
flexibility. In the end, the real beneficiaries will be the young
people this flexibility will put on track to achieve the American
Dream. A job they can be proud of, and which allows them to own a home
and raise a family.
As the Committee continues to evaluate legislation this Congress
and work on the WIOA reauthorization, I look forward to working with
you to embrace more local flexibility so we can fast-track workforce
development and revitalize towns and cities across America. The changes
in my bill could get more people trained, grow our workforce in rural
America, and resurrect our small towns as we bring manufacturing back
to the United States.
I want to thank the committee again for the opportunity to speak
here today, and I appreciate the work you do on these pressing issues.
I respectfully urge you to include my Workforce Flexibility Act in
the WIOA reauthorization, and I look forward to continuing to work with
you to usher in America's Golden Age.
Thank you and I yield back.
______
Chairman Walberg. I thank the Representative.
I appreciate you all being here.
Under Committee Rule 9, we would now question witnesses
under the 5-minute rule. Does anyone wish to ask questions?
Well, I will take my opportunity.
Representative Hern, I recognize your concern very clearly
to make sure that the continuing whipsaw, specifically on joint
employer, does not continue. With your legislation, there are
two pieces of legislation within our jurisdiction that address
that key issue. One is much broader across the spectrum of
businesses. Yours is much narrower just for franchise. Could
you care to comment on the reason why your more limited
approach would be necessary even with the much broader piece of
legislation that would take your concerns in as well?
Mr. Hern. Sure. I think, when you have a broader audience
that you are trying to find all the nuances with the larger
bill. Speaking strictly for franchising, something I have spent
my entire life in, seeing people that came from all walks of
life, needing the opportunity but not knowing if they are
willing to take that risk or not with the uncertainty that
happens--that, 1 day, you might invest a lot of money, and, the
very next day, based on the change of administration when there
is no law in place to that clearly defines the joint employer
alignment, you can invest all your money, and the next day
become an employee of that brand.
That was never meant for the entire time that franchising
has been around since, you know, for 70 years. It was to
provide the opportunity where a brand came in, whatever the
brand may be--it did not have to be a restaurant--but it came
in and provided the technical expertise to get you started off
so you did not have the startup costs to deal with. Those are
amortized through the franchise agreement and the opportunity
to go in there.
You also have the ability to go out there and look at these
brands across the Nation. With the prevalence of social media
and other things out there, the internet, it is very easy to
monitor the behavior of franchisors, the bad ones and the good
ones, and be able to pick and choose. That is inside of that
agreement.
The external pressures on the franchising and the joint
employer issue that started in 2015 with the BFI issue out in
California, a much broader issue, not necessarily franchising
but more of a leasing arrangement, we are trying to define this
specifically for an industry? Quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, just
take that off your plate. Make it easy. Get that piece out of
there so that we were looking at a broader situation so that
these men and women, these African Americans, Asians, Hispanics
across America that have invested their entire life, and many
multigenerational franchises can have assurances that the
moneys and the time and energy that they have invested, not
only in their businesses but in their people and in their
families, can have certainty that those will be in existence
come 3 years from now or 3 months from now.
Chairman Walberg. Thank you.
Mr. Scott. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Walberg. I recognize the ranking member.
Mr. Scott. Yes. Mr. Chairman, following up on that, I
thought I heard you say that you would be considered a joint
employer if you had one or more--if you satisfied one or more
of the measures of control. Some bills have it set up where you
have to have--you are not an employer unless you have each and
every measure of control. Have you compared your bills to the
other bills that are pending?
Mr. Hern. I have not. I mean, I am sure my staff has, but
we tried to be very specific on this one so that we clearly
defined. I can tell you, again, having worked at the highest
level of leadership for the franchisees--and unlike Congress,
we did not get paid to do it; we did it for paying it forward--
it was a grave concern for both entities, franchisor and
franchisee, that there was a complete delineation between those
responsibilities.
McDonald's, quite frankly, I will just choose them as the
person--the group that I worked with for many years, obviously,
a brand well known, if they were going to be involved as a
joint employer, there is no question that their--just as it
would for anybody on the dais here, that, if you are
responsible for the hiring, you are going to be in that
restaurant every day as a corporation. It all of a sudden
becomes a corporation.
If you are a franchisee of that brand, whatever the brand
is, you wanted that pushback, that separation. You wanted the
independence of being a businessperson. You worked your life
working for somebody, and so you wanted that delineation. We
are not trying to protect the franchisor from, you know, being
somebody that is egregious, tell you who you have to hire, how
much you have to pay. That is the independence of the
individual franchisee.
Mr. Scott. Now, there have been a lot of challenges to
McDonald's. Has McDonald's corporate ever been ruled to be a
joint employer?
Mr. Hern. I do not know the legal action that is taken
against any franchisor out there.
Mr. Scott. Okay. I think if you are using one or more of
the criteria, you may be consistent with the present--with some
of the roles that we might even come to agreement on.
Let me ask, Dr. Dexter, Representative Dexter, I guess, in
this context, you talked about the support you have got to
become a physician. Are you familiar with what happened in that
legislation, that ``big ugly bill''? How would that affect a
person's ability to become a physician?
Ms. Dexter. Yes, sir. Thank you so much, Ranking Member
Scott, for asking that. In fact, I was just meeting with
members of the American Medical Association from Oregon this
week. It is going to have devastating impacts on our physician
population.
You know, kids like me, I was economically disadvantaged
but not racially disadvantaged, clearly. Getting into medical
school would not have been possible for me in any way without
the educational opportunities that these loans had.
The undermining of DEI efforts as well as economic support
right now is going to put us in a place where White privileged
people are the only ones that can take care of us, because--
well, that is not entirely true. I am sorry for that. There is
obviously privileged people of color, but it----
Mr. Scott. Do you mean people that can write a $50,000
check?
Ms. Dexter. Yes. It is not even $50,000. Most are
graduating with $200,000 to $300,000.
Mr. Scott. Well, yes, but they can get through because they
had access to the loans. If those loans are limited and you do
not have access to the loans, what chance does a person who
relied on those loans, what chance would they have of becoming
a physician?
Ms. Dexter. It is not just that they will unlikely have the
opportunity to be a physician. If they do choose to be a
physician and have that high of a loan debt, they will go into
specialty care and higher paying specialties. We have an
extraordinary shortage of primary care physicians in this
country, and it does not pay enough as it is for--you know, I
graduated with $150,000 in debt. Luckily, the Biden-Harris plan
relieved me of that debt. I will be totally candid: I was
paying for over 20 years, and that debt was just relieved a
year and a half ago. I would still be paying on that, and I had
already paid in excess of what my principal had been by this
time because of the cost of----
Mr. Scott. Well, one of the problems with that ``big ugly
bill'' is it limits the amount of loans. If you cannot come up
with the cash----
Ms. Dexter. That is right.
Mr. Scott [continuing]. Over what you can put together in
Pells and loans, it is going to be at least $50,000 maybe more
than that.
Ms. Dexter. If there is----
Mr. Scott. If you cannot come up with that, you cannot go.
Ms. Dexter. I am so sorry, Mr. Ranking Member. That was
very rude of me. I am obviously passionate about this area. It
is also going to put people into, we will say, malicious
loaning practices. Like, people who really want to be a doctor
will put themselves in a position where they can be taken
advantage of, and that is obviously not anything that we want
people starting their career with.
Thank you, Mr. Ranking Member.
Mr. Scott. Thank you. I yield back.
Chairman Walberg. I thank the gentleman.
Any further questions?
Well, hearing none, I want to express appreciation to the
panel coming in front of us, and certainly, these are all
issues that we have addressed. We may disagree on some of them
on this committee and even at the panel, but they have been
taken seriously.
I would like to thank you again for testifying before the
committee today.
Without objection, there being no further business, the
committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 9:51 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[Additional submissions from Representative Barr follows:]
The Hon. Andy Barr, a Representative in Congress From the State of
Kentucky
Chairman Walberg, thank you for the opportunity to submit this
statement for the record in support of the Defend Girls Athletics Act.
I am proud to lead this legislation to protect the integrity of women's
sports and uphold basic principles of fairness, safety, and biological
reality in our nation's schools.
Across the country, parents, students, and female athletes are
raising serious concerns as biological males are increasingly allowed
to compete in girls' and women's athletics. This trend is plainly
unfair and undermines the purpose of Title IX, which Congress enacted
more than fifty years ago. Title IX was designed to expand
opportunities for women and girls, not to diminish them. Under prior
federal guidance and activist policies in certain school districts
anduniversities, women have seen their opportunities reduced, their
scholarships threatened, and their accomplishments overshadowed.
President Trump recognized this growing problem and issued the
Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports executive order, reaffirming that
participation in female athletics must be based on biological sex. The
Defend Girls Athletics Act codifies that policy and ensures that these
protections cannot be weakened or reversed by a future administration.
The legislation establishes a clear federal standard that schools and
colleges receiving federal funds must limit participation in women's
athletic programs to individuals whose biological sex is female. This
standard is simple, rooted in common sense, and strongly supported by
families across the nation.
To ensure accountability, the bill includes straightforward
compliance measures. K-12 school districts must certify each year that
they meet the federal standard, and states must verify that their
districts follow the law. Schools or states that refuse to comply risk
the loss of unobligated federal funds until they return to compliance.
At the higher education level, colleges and universities must make the
same annual certification to remain eligible for federal support,
including grants and participation in federal student aid programs.
These expectations are reasonable. Institutions that receive
federal taxpayer dollars should be required to uphold fairness and
protect the integrity of girls' and women's sports. The legislation
does not create burdensome new mandates. It simply ensures that female
athletes can compete on a level playing field, without losing roster
spots, scholarships, or championships to biological males.
Congress has a responsibility to uphold Title IX, defend women and
girls, and ensure that federal education funding reinforces fairness,
safety, and common sense.
The Defend Girls Athletics Act fulfills that responsibility with
clarity and resolve.
I urge my colleagues on the Committee and throughout Congress to
support this essential legislation, which already has 57 cosponsors.
Female athletes have waited long enough for the federal government to
stand with them.
It is time to restore fairness, uphold Title IX, and defend girls'
athletics nationwide.
______
[Additional submissions from Representative Lee follows:]
The Hon. Susie Lee, a Representative in Congress From the State of
Nevada
Chairman Walberg, Ranking Member Scott, and members of the House
Committee on Education and the Workforce, thank you for providing me
with the opportunity to share my perspective on issues under the
Committee's jurisdiction.
I am proud product of the public education system and put myself
through college with a combination of part-time jobs, scholarships, and
loans. Before coming to Congress, I spent more than two decades working
with Nevada schools to support students, prevent dropouts, and
strengthen our public education system. As a lifelong education
advocate, I know that education is the key to opportunity.
That is why I introduced the Keep Our Promise to America's Children
and Teachers Act (H.R. 869) to ensure school districts in Nevada and
across the country have the resources they need to strengthen
opportunities for all students--regardless of the extra needs they may
have or what zip code they live in.
This bill would put Congress on a fiscally responsible path to meet
its obligation to fully fund Title I and the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) on a mandatory basis over the next 10
years.
More than 200 schools across Nevada's Clark County School District
rely on Title I funding, which gives assistance to America's highest-
need schools, but theprogram has been seriously underfunded for decades
at the federal level. From 2005 to 2017, Title I was underfunded by
about $347 billion, preventing southern Nevada schools from addressing
critical issues like school safety, teacher retention, and mental
health.
Similarly, chronic underfunding of IDEA has shortchanged Nevada
schools by an estimated $1.96 billion in IDEA grants between 2005 and
2017, greatly diminishing their ability to serve children with
disabilities.
As elected officials, it is our responsibility to ensure all
students in our communities have the resources and opportunities they
need to succeed. That means we must fully fund these vital programs,
not tear them apart.
While the current Administration continues to undermine access to
education by dismantling the Department of Education and defunding
critical programs, I remain committed to working with my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle to improve educational opportunities and
outcomes for our communities.
Nevada currently has the fewest teachers per students in the
country, with an average of 43 teachers per 1,000 students. With this
shortage already straining in-classroom demands, the supply of targeted
after-school resources is especially affected, emphasizing the need to
support workforce development for teachers as well as fill the gap in
additional tutoring needs.
To address this gap, I lead the bipartisan Partnering Aspiring
Teachers with High-Need Schools (PATHS) to Tutor Act, which I will be
reintroducing in the coming weeks. This bill expands access to one-on-
one and small group tutoring for students in underserved communities.
The legislation also leverages our existing workforce pool and creates
new opportunities for future teachers by placing teacher-candidates in
these tutoring roles.
By placing teacher-candidates into tutoring roles, this bill
strengthens the pipeline of future teachers in the long run, while
ensuring students in underservedcommunities receive targeted academic
support in the short run.
Finally, as we aim to meet the needs of all students, it is
essential that we support evidence-based methods to address in- and
out-of-school barriers to learning. Community schools are key to
addressing these barriers.
That is why I also lead the Full-Service Community School Expansion
Act, which I will be reintroducing in the coming months. This
legislation expands the Full-Service Community Schools grant program to
meet the demand across the country for wraparound services to support
struggling students and families.
A full-service community school is a public elementary or secondary
school that participates in a community-based effort to coordinate and
integrate educational, developmental, family, health, and other
comprehensive services through community-based organizations and public
and private partnerships; and provides in-school access to such
services to students, families, and the community.
As the former President of Communities in Schools (CIS) of Nevada,
I understand just how valuable the work of community schools is for
their communities. CIS of Nevada is an education non-profit serving
over 89,000 students annually in Clark County School District. Their
programs are in over 100 schools, focusing on providing equitable
access to educational resources and support. In Nevada, 99% of K-11
students involved in CIS programs were promoted to the next grade level
and 96% of CIS students go on to graduate.
The model of integrated student supports (ISS) utilized by CIS is a
clear example of a proven, evidence-based approach that improve
educational outcomes in our communities. With trained site coordinators
directly in schools, students are able to receive the resources and
support they need to address their unique needs andovercome their
challenges. These methods have been proven to increase students'
earning potential by 4.3% and improve graduation rates by 3.4%. We must
do our part to support community schools that are critical to ensuring
everyone has the resources and opportunities they deserve.
I remain committed to working with my colleagues on this Committee
to push forward common-sense solutions that ensure access to
educational opportunities, support students and teachers, and improve
outcomes for students. I encourage the Committee to provide full
consideration to the Keep Our PACT Act, PATHS to Tutor Act, and Full-
Service Community Schools Expansion Act.
Thank you again for providing this opportunity. I look forward to
collaborating with the Committee to make life for Nevadans better.
______
[Additional submissions from Representative Takano
follows:]
The Hon. Mark Takano, a Representative in Congress From the State of
California
Chairman Walberg, Ranking Member Scott, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit this written
testimony. I applaud your leadership and appreciate you allowing
Members to share their priorities. In that spirit, I implore the
Committee to provide robust support for student borrowers and overtime
protections for hardworking Americans. It is of equal importance that
we support Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) as they navigate the
Trump Administration's unilateral cancellation of many of their grants
and funding. All three of these issues will have a major impact on the
landscape for American students and worker success in this country.
The American Dream is built on the promise of a high-quality
education. We tell our students that if you work hard, you can access
some of the best educational opportunities in the world and build a
life-sustaining career. However, this Dream is only a reality if
institutions are held accountable for providing students with a high-
quality education and student borrowers are protected from predatory
practices that would leave them crushed by debt.
In an era when young people are skeptical about the cost-benefit
relationship to a college education and the political atmosphere has
been hostile to educational institutions, Congress must demonstrate our
commitment to students with targeted and thoughtful policy. This
Committee is tasked with providing equal education and opportunity for
every student, regardless of their background.
To that end, my legislation, the PROTECT Students Act, addresses
several areas of the college experience to ensure students are
safeguarded. This bill increases oversight of institutions of higher
education, makes it easier for students to eliminate their loans if
they were defrauded and eases the ability of students to bring class
action lawsuits against for-profit universities, holds universities
accountable by ensuring schools are honest about their job placement
data, predatory recruitment tactics, and ensure that former fraudsters
cannot prey on students again.
The PROTECT Students Act will save taxpayers millions of dollars
each year by preventing student aid money being paid out to programs
that do not deliver for students--programs that far too often leave
students with debt they cannot afford and no degree or credential to
show for it. It ensures that owners of for-profit colleges can be
required to meet specified conditions through the Program Participation
Agreement--the federal contract colleges and universities sign in order
to receive federal aid. By creating a new metric of instructional
spending, it sets out a new way of differentiating the outcomes of
schools that are under resourced from schools that simply churn
taxpayer aid into corporate profits and payouts. And finally, the bill
restores and streamlines the rights of students who were lied to or
defrauded by creating a clear and simple path for students to establish
a defense to repayment.
H.R. 1 unfortunately made it harder for students and student
veterans to establish that they have been defrauded--that is a deeply
unfortunate consequence since ensuring students can establish they were
lied to has served as a tremendous disincentive to misconduct by
predatory schools. The PROTECT Students Act would fix this. In order to
safeguard the future of our younger generations, we need consider this
legislation immediately.
Equally important is ensuring a strong economic future for
America's workforce. This country is long overdue for robust reform of
the overtime threshold, which remains at a woefully low and inadequate
$35,500 per year. The first Trump Administration set this threshold,
despite $35,500 being far below a livable wage in any state in the
United States. It has remained there for far too long.
I am proud to lead the Restoring Overtime Pay Act, a bill which
seeks to raise the overtime threshold to a historic high of the 55th
percentile of earnings for full-time salaried workers nationwide.
This effort paves the way for millions of American workers
previously excluded from overtime compensation to receive overtime pay
for their hours worked. It will strengthen the economy, increase
workers' spending power, and take a significant step towards ensuring
that the American economy works for all workers, not just those in the
highest earning brackets.
We need to focus our time on putting money back in workers'
pockets, and I urge the Committee to take up this bill as soon as
possible.
Finally, I ask that this Committee demand explanations from
Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and the Trump Administration on
their decision making regarding the elimination of Minority Serving
Institution (MSI) programs. Secretary McMahon must work with Congress
regarding any major action on these programs, and she and the
Administration have overstepped their authority by moving forward
without engaging the legislative branch.
The Department of Education announced it would cancel and
reallocate funding for several MSI programs, including Hispanic-Serving
Institutions (HSIs) and Asian American and Native American Pacific
Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISI). MSIs are colleges and
universities that enroll some of the most racially and ethnically
diverse students across the United States. The Department of Education
has provided funding to help colleges design and build programs to
ensure their students are equipped to enter the workforce. These
include programs that educate and prepare students in artificial
intelligence and strengthen research capabilities.
In the State of California, there are 54 HSI, 12 MSI, and 12
AANAPISI active grant recipients. If funding is completely reallocated,
California colleges and universities could lose upwards of $50 million
over the next several years. Eliminating these programs would hinder
the efforts made by colleges and universities to prepare students to
succeed in the evolving job market. With budgets already tight, some
established programs would be difficult to replace with state funds
because state dollars are primarily formula-driven and already
committed to core operations and state priorities.
Secretary McMahon must agree to discuss this decision--among
others--with Congress before proceeding. This will impact millions of
students' ability to succeed and erode decades of progress towards
making higher education more accessible and equitable.
Chairman Walberg, Ranking Member Scott, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for your time and leadership. I look forward to
working with you all.
[all]