[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 136 (Friday, September 27, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11477-S11478]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 WORK FORCE AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT ACT

  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, I wish also to speak as chairman of an 
authorizing committee, the Labor and Human Resources Committee, about 
my frustration that we cannot act on a piece of legislation I think is 
very important. It deals with job training reform. It is called the 
Work Force and Career Development Act. Numerous hearings have been held 
on this bill over the past 2 years of the 104th Congress. It passed the 
Senate with only two dissenting votes. It passed the House. And now we 
have on the calendar a conference report. It is enormously 
disappointing to me that in the final days of the 104th Congress we are 
subject to dilatory tactics, and if legislation is not going to be 
called up today, or at the latest Monday, there is no hope of it 
succeeding.
  So I would like to speak for a moment, before this legislation will 
be put in the dust bin of the 104th Congress, on the need for major job 
training reform. I would like to speak on why I believe it was so 
important for us to have been able to consider this legislation and my 
disappointment that it cannot be brought forward.
  The legislation would have reformed our job training and training-
related programs. There is no doubt that the current maze of training 
programs is woefully inadequate to address the very real and immediate 
needs of workers for training and education. I think nothing makes us 
more aware of this than reports we have continually heard about how 
important skilled workers are to our work force today and the 
importance of vocational education.

  Despite over $5 billion which the Federal Government spends annually 
on our various job training programs, the results are less than 
impressive. Study after study has pointed out the waste and overlap 
among job training programs that now exists.
  Just to name a few, in January of 1994, the General Accounting Office 
issued a report, entitled ``Conflicting Requirements Hampered Delivery 
of Services.''

  Another GAO report was issued in March of 1994: ``Most Federal 
Agencies Do Not Know if Their Programs Are Working Effectively.'' Other 
titles include: ``Overlap Among Training Programs Raises Questions 
About Efficiency,'' and ``Major Overhaul Needed To Reduce Costs, 
Streamline the Bureaucracy, and Improve Results.''
  According to a 1996 GAO report, entitled ``Long-Term Earnings and 
Employment Outcomes,'' few training programs have been rigorously 
evaluated to assess their true impact on the long-term earnings of 
participants. While there may be some positive effects for participants 
shortly after training, the GAO found that over a 5-year period JTPA, 
the Job Training Partnership Act, participants rarely earn much more 
than comparable individuals who do not participate in that program, and 
their employment rates are only slightly higher. Despite months of 
training and placement assistance, the GAO could not attribute the 
higher earnings to JTPA training rather than to chance alone.
  All too often, Mr. President, training programs spell disappointment 
for those who have sought assistance in building a better life for 
themselves and their families. That is why I think this is such a 
missed opportunity. We have talked and talked about reinventing 
government. That was an initiative that President Clinton, when he took 
office, announced he was going to undertake. This is a perfect example 
of where we had the opportunity to do so, and now we find we are 
thwarted from voting on the conference report on this important piece 
of legislation.
  We heard testimony before the Committee on Labor and Human Resources 
from Ernestine Dunn who said that her experience with Federal job 
training programs was ``a journey [she] thought would never end.'' She 
spent over 10 years and went through eight different job-training 
programs before getting the job skills and training she needed to get 
off welfare and into a permanent, well-paying job.
  Her experience is not unique. With all the different programs and 
organizations that deliver services, people have difficulty knowing 
where to begin to look for assistance. As a result, they may go to the 
wrong agency or, worse, give up altogether. When training is provided, 
it often results in only part-time or temporary work. We must do better 
if we are going to create a world-class work force that can compete in 
the 21st century. I believe it is

[[Page S11478]]

our responsibility to see that we assist and work with local and State 
governments and the business community to do just that.
  The Congress and the President both agree that reform is long 
overdue. Less than 1 year ago, as I said, we passed this with 
overwhelming bipartisan majorities. Last October, the ranking member of 
the Labor and Human Resources Committee, Senator Kennedy, remarked that 
``this is an area of public policy which is of great significance and 
importance to working families in this country and of great 
significance and importance to the United States as a nation and its 
ability to compete.'' That was true then and is even more true now. 
With ever rapid advances in technology, workers will have to constantly 
change and upgrade their skills in order to compete.
  The importance of training and education were also central to the 
debate and passage of the welfare reform legislation this summer. In 
order for welfare recipients to successfully make the transition to 
work, they must have the training, education, and job skills that will 
help them get in jobs and stay in jobs. That is what this legislation 
is all about.

  It is not about programming a child from kindergarten clear through 
high school in a career path. It is about giving our States and our 
local communities the resources to help design flexible programs that 
will meet the needs of Kansans, or meet the needs of those who live in 
New Hampshire or Maine or California. There are differing needs in 
differing States and at different times in a person's progress through 
school and work.
  Again, that is what this legislation is all about. It would allow the 
States the flexibility to design integrated systems where services are 
delivered on a one-stop basis. No longer would an individual have to go 
to several different offices for help. With a one-stop system they 
could get job counseling, skills training, and other services all in 
one place. That is what the administration said they wanted as well.
  Meeting these challenges will not be an easy task. One possible 
response might be to increase funding for education and training. We 
are on the way to doing just that. I am troubled, however, that we 
would pursue this course while leaving in place the same old programs 
which we all recognize do not work. More funding, I would argue, will 
not advance the type of major structural overhaul and consolidation of 
training and education programs that is needed to create a workforce 
system that can serve the local needs of job seekers and employers 
alike. It is a Band-Aid approach that deals only with the symptoms and 
not the underlying causes of the problem.
  This bill would consolidate over 90 programs of various job training 
efforts scattered among 15 different agencies. It really does take us 
in a new direction that I think offers positive assistance. So, it is 
with enormous disappointment that I see these efforts may now be 
wasted--but I hope not--as we complete the 104th Congress. For those 
who will remain, because I will be retiring, it is my hope that what we 
have laid out here in months and months of work can provide a 
background for further efforts in the 105th Congress.
  This legislation has been strongly supported by the National 
Governors' Association, both Democratic and Republican Governors. They 
believed this was one of the most important pieces of legislation that 
could be passed in this Congress.
  The workforce development conference report that is now on the 
calendar is a result of 2 years of bipartisan work to develop a vision 
of a workforce development system for the 21st century. The elements of 
this common vision include:
  Flexibility for the States to design systems that meet their own 
needs, while preserving the core activities traditionally supported by 
the Federal Government;
  Greater coordination among educators, trainers, and the business 
people who create the jobs for which individuals are being trained;
  Innovative strategies like vouchers to improve training; and
  Improved effectiveness of programs by focusing on results, not 
bureaucratic redtape.
  This conference report, I think, deserves the full support of all 
those, both Republican and Democrat, who were committed to achieving 
broad job training reform less than 1 year ago. One of the staunchest 
supporters of this effort is on the other side of the aisle, Mr. 
President, Senator Kerrey of Nebraska.
  Some have complained the conference report does not go far enough in 
preserving a Federal role in job training. Others claim it creates too 
broad a Federal role. I do not believe that any of the specific 
criticisms that were leveled against this bill are significant enough 
to bring down such a solid piece of legislation which has been years in 
the making.
  I had hoped that what began as a bipartisan effort with passage of 
the reform efforts in both the Senate and House would come to 
completion in a bipartisan vote of support for the conference report. 
We are faced with a challenge of creating a new and coherent system in 
which all segments of the workforce can obtain the skills necessary to 
earn wages sufficient to maintain a a high quality of living. In 
addition, American businesses need a skilled workforce that can compete 
in the world marketplace. I believe this legislation gives the States 
the necessary tools to meet those challenges.
  We should not have allowed the distractions of an election year to 
detract us from moving forward in a bipartisan fashion on this 
legislation, which I believe is so important.
  Mr. President, I conclude by saying it is my hope that in the 105th 
Congress it will be one of the top priorities as we recognize how 
extremely important it is for us to address our skilled work force for 
the 21st century.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.

                          ____________________