House Report 106-642 - TRAINING AND EDUCATION FOR AMERICAN WORKERS ACT OF 2000

[House Report 106-642]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-642

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

TRAINING AND EDUCATION FOR AMERICAN WORKERS ACT OF 2000

_______

May 25, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Goodling, from the Committee on Education and the Workforce,
submitted the following

R E P O R T

together with

ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 4402]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Education and the Workforce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 4402) to amend the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 to
improve the use of amounts deposited into the H-1B Nonimmigrant
Petitioner Account for demonstration programs and projects to
provide technical skills training for occupations for which
there is a high demand for skilled workers, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do
pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Training and Education for American
Workers Act of 2000''.

SEC. 2. USE OF H-1B NONIMMIGRANT PETITIONER FEES.

Section 414(c) of the American Competitiveness and Workforce
Improvement Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2916 note) is amended to read as
follows:
``(c) Demonstration Programs and Projects To Provide Technical Skills
Training for Workers; Loan Forgiveness for Mathematics, Science, and
Reading Teachers.--
``(1) Technical skills training for workers.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary of Labor shall use
75 percent of the funds made available under section
286(s)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1356(s)(2)) to establish demonstration programs
or projects to provide technical skills training for
employed and unemployed workers for any skill shortage
related to a specialty occupation (as defined in
section 214(i)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(i)(1)).
``(B) Grants.--The Secretary of Labor shall award
grants to carry out programs or projects described in
subparagraph (A) to--
``(i) local workforce investment boards
established under section 117 of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2832);
``(ii) regional consortia of local boards
described in clause (i); or
``(iii) in conjunction with, and with the
active participation of, local boards described
in clause (i), consortia (which may be local,
regional, or multistate consortia)--
``(I) a majority of whose members are
a business or represent a business; and
``(II) whose membership may include
representatives of State and local
governments, community-based
organizations (as defined in section
101 of the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801)), educational
institutions, and labor organizations
(for a local area, as defined in such
section 101, in which employees are
represented by labor organizations),
nominated by local labor federations,
or (for a local area, as so defined, in
which no employees are represented by
such organizations), other
representatives of employees.
``(C) Priority projects.--In awarding grants under
subparagraph (B), the Secretary of Labor shall give
priority to programs or projects that train employed
and unemployed workers in skills that are in shortage
in the high technology, information technology, and
biotechnology fields, including software and
communications services, telecommunications, systems
installation and integration, computers and
communications hardware, health care technology,
biotechnology, and biomedical research, manufacturing,
and innovation services.
``(D) Grant application requirements.--An application
for a grant under this paragraph shall include--
``(i) specific goals for each program or
project for which funds are sought, including
targets for measurable increases in skill gains
for those individuals being trained under the
program or project; and
``(ii) an agreement that the program or
project shall be subject to evaluations by the
Secretary of Labor to measure its
effectiveness.
``(E) Matching funds.--Each grantee receiving funds
under this paragraph shall demonstrate the manner by
which the grantee will provide matching resources (in
the form of cash, in-kind contributions, or both) equal
to at least 25 percent of the total grant amount
awarded.
``(F) Target population.--Each grantee receiving
funds under this paragraph shall make efforts actively
to recruit and train individuals who traditionally are
underrepresented in information technology occupations,
such as minorities, women, low-wage workers, workers
residing in empowerment zones and enterprise
communities (as defined in section 1393(b) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986), and individuals with a
disability.
``(2) Loan forgiveness for mathematics, science, and reading
teachers.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Secretary of Labor shall transfer
to the Secretary of Education 25 percent of the funds
made available to the Secretary of Labor under section
286(s)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1356(s)(2)).
``(B) Use of funds.--The Secretary of Education shall
use funds made available under subparagraph (A) to
carry out section 3 of the Training and Education for
American Workers Act of 2000.''.

SEC. 3. LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM FOR MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND READING
TEACHERS.

(a) Program.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Education (in this section
referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall carry out a program of
assuming the obligation to repay, pursuant to subsection (c), a
loan made, insured, or guaranteed under part B of title IV of
the Higher Education Act of 1965 or part D of such title
(excluding loans made under sections 428B and 428C of such Act
or comparable loans made under part D of such title) for any
new borrower after October 1, 1998, who--
(A) has been employed, for 3 consecutive complete
school years, as--
(i) a full-time teacher of mathematics,
science, or a related field; or
(ii) a full-time teacher responsible for
providing reading instruction in any of grades
kindergarten through 3d grade;
(B) satisfies the requirements of subsection (d); and
(C) is not in default on a loan for which the
borrower seeks forgiveness.
(2) Award basis; priority.--
(A) Award basis.--Subject to subparagraph (B), loan
repayment under this section shall be on a first-come,
first-serve basis and subject to the availability of
appropriations.
(B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in
providing loan repayment under this section for a
fiscal year to student borrowers who received loan
repayment under this section for the preceding fiscal
year.
(3) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to prescribe
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
(b) Loan Repayment.--
(1) Eligible amount.--The amount the Secretary may repay on
behalf of any individual under this section shall not exceed--
(A) the sum of the principal amounts outstanding (not
to exceed $3,000) of the individual's qualifying loans
at the end of 3 consecutive complete school years of
service described in subsection (a)(1)(A);
(B) an additional portion of such sum (not to exceed
$1,000) at the end of each of the next 2 consecutive
complete school years of such service; and
(C) a total of not more than $5,000.
(2) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be construed
to authorize the refunding of any repayment of a loan made
under part B or D of title IV of the Higher Education Act of
1965.
(3) Interest.--If a portion of a loan is repaid by the
Secretary under this section for any year, the proportionate
amount of interest on such loan which accrues for such year
shall be repaid by the Secretary.
(c) Repayment to Eligible Lenders.--The Secretary shall pay to each
eligible lender or holder for each fiscal year an amount equal to the
aggregate amount of loans which are subject to repayment pursuant to
this section for such year.
(d) Application for Repayment.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible individual desiring loan
repayment under this section shall submit a complete and
accurate application to the Secretary at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may
require.
(2) Conditions.--
(A) Years of service.--An eligible individual may
apply for loan repayment under this section after
completing the required number of years of qualifying
employment.
(B) Fully qualified teachers in public elementary or
secondary schools.--An application for loan repayment
under this section shall include such information as is
necessary to demonstrate that the applicant--
(i) if teaching in a public elementary,
middle, or secondary school (other than as a
teacher in a public charter school), has
obtained State certification as a teacher
(including certification obtained through
alternative routes to certification) or passed
the State teacher licensing exam and holds a
license to teach in such State; and
(ii) if teaching in--
(I) a public elementary school, holds
a bachelor's degree and demonstrates
knowledge and teaching skills in
reading, writing, mathematics, science,
and other areas of the elementary
school curriculum; or
(II) a public middle or secondary
school, holds a bachelor's degree and
demonstrates a high level of competency
in all subject areas in which he or she
teaches through--
(aa) a high level of
performance on a rigorous State
or local academic subject areas
test; or
(bb) completion of an
academic major in each of the
subject areas in which he or
she provides instruction.
(C) Teachers in nonprofit private elementary or
secondary schools or charter schools.--In the case of
an applicant who is teaching in a nonprofit private
elementary or secondary school, or in a charter school,
an application for loan repayment under this section
shall include such information as is necessary to
demonstrate that the applicant has knowledge and
teaching skills in reading, writing, and mathematics,
as certified by the chief administrative officer of the
school.
(e) Treatment of Consolidation Loans.--A loan amount for a
consolidation loan made under section 428C of the Higher Education Act
of 1965, or a Federal Direct Consolidation Loan made under part D of
title IV of such Act, may be a qualified loan amount for the purpose of
this section only to the extent that such loan amount was used by a
borrower who otherwise meets the requirements of this section to
repay--
(1) a loan made under section 428 or 428H of such Act; or
(2) a Federal Direct Stafford Loan, or a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Stafford Loan, made under part D of title IV of
such Act.
(f) Funds for Program.--The Secretary shall carry out this section
with funds made available under section 414(c)(2) of the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2916
note).

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall take effect on
October 1, 2000.

Purpose

The purpose of H.R. 4402, the Training and Education for
American Workers Act of 2000, is to improve the use of funds
accumulated by the H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account for
demonstration programs and projects to provide technical skills
training for occupations for which there is a high demand for
skilled workers and for other purposes.

Committee Action

On May 9, 2000, Representative Bill Goodling (R-PA)
introduced H.R. 4402, the Training and Education for American
Workers Act of 2000, to amend the American Competitiveness and
Workforce Investment Act (ACWIA) of 1998. This Act improves the
use of funds deposited into the H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner
Account for demonstration programs and projects to provide
technical skills training for occupations for which there is a
high demand for skilled workers, and for other purposes.
On May 10, 2000, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce assembled to consider H.R. 4402. An amendment in the
nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Goodling was adopted by
voice vote, and the bill, as amended, was reported by the
Committee on Education and the Workforce by voice vote. Below
is a description of the adopted amendments to H.R. 4402:
The Goodling amendment in the nature of a substitute
included a technical modification to H.R. 4402 as introduced.
Rep. Ehlers (R-MI) introduced an amendment to allow
qualified math, science and kindergarten to third grade reading
teachers, who otherwise meet the requirements of the loan
forgiveness programs established under this legislation, to
receive loan forgiveness regardless of the school in which they
teach. The amendment passed 28 yeas to 15 nays.
Rep. Ford (D-KY) introduced an amendment to enable
representatives of community-based organizations, as defined
under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA), to serve as a
member of a business-led consortia eligible to carry out job
training projects under this legislation. The amendment was
adopted by voice vote.
Rep. Tierney (D-MA) introduced an amendment to clarify that
business-led consortia receiving job-training funds under this
legislation shall work in conjunction with the active support
of local workforce investment boards. The amendment was adopted
by voice vote.

Summary

H.R. 4402 amends Section 414(c) of the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 to
improve the use of funds deposited into the H-1B Nonimmigrant
Petitioner Account.

job training funds

Currently under the Immigration and Nationality Act 56.3
percent of funds deposited into the H-1B Nonimmigrant
Petitioner Account is directed to the secretary of labor for
demonstration programs or projects under 414(c) of the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998. H.R.
4402 directs 75 percent of the 56.3 percent toward
demonstration programs and projects to provide technical skills
training for workers.
Under current law, eligibility for these funds is limited
to private industry councils established under the Job Training
Partnership Act of 1982, as in effect on the date of enactment
of ACWIA; local workforce investment boards established under
WIA; or regional consortia of such councils. Section 2 of H.R.
4402 drops references to private industry councils due to the
fact these councils have since been replaced by workforce
investment boards under WIA. These new workforce investment
boards and regional consortia are eligible for these grants. In
addition, the bill extends eligibility to business-led
consortia, which may also include representatives of labor (as
described under WIA), representatives of state and local
government, community based organizations (as defined under
WIA), and educational institutions.
Current law states that funds under this part are to
provide ``technical skills training for workers * * *'' H.R.
4402, clarifies that such programs or projects be limited to
those addressing skill shortages in specialty occupations (as
defined in section 214(i)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(i)(1)). H.R. 4402 further provides priority
for those projects that train employees and unemployed workers
in skills that are in shortage in the high technology,
information technology, and biotechnology fields.
As the law stands today, there is no statutory requirement
for how funds under this part are to be held accountable. H.R.
4402 requires each application for a grant to include specific
goals for each program or project for which funds are sought,
including targets for measurable increases in skill gains for
those individuals being trained. It also authorizes the
secretary to evaluate such program to measure effectiveness.
Although no authority currently exists for the secretary of
labor to require grantees receiving job-training funds under
this part to provide matching resources, the secretary has
imposed such requirement on grants awarded to date. H.R. 4402
requires each grantee to provide matching resources (in the
form of cash, in-kind contributions, or both) equal to at least
25 percent of the total grant amount awarded.
Under current law, there is no requirement that funds be
targeted to certain populations. H.R. 4402 requires each
grantee to make an effort to recruit and train individuals who
traditionally are underrepresented in information technology
occupations.

loan forgiveness for mathematics, science, and reading teachers

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act 56.3 percent of
funds deposited into the H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account
is directed to the secretary of labor for demonstration
programs or projects under 414(c) of the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998. H.R.
4402 directs the secretary of labor to transfer 25 percent of
the 56.3 percent of funds to the secretary of education to
carry out a loan forgiveness program for mathematics, science
and kindergarten through third grade reading teachers. Under
current law, no funds under this part are reserved for the
purpose of student loan forgiveness.
Under section 3(a) of H.R. 4402, the secretary of
education, using funds described above, is to carry out a
program of assuming the obligation to repay a loan made,
insured, or guaranteed under part B of Title IV of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 or part D of such Title (excluding loans
made under section 428B and 428C of such act or comparable
loans made under part D of such Title) for any new borrower
after October 1, 1998, who meets specific criteria.
This criteria includes a requirement that such teacher has
taught full time for three consecutive years in math, science
or has been a full-time teacher responsible for providing
reading instruction to students in kindergarten through third
grade for three consecutive years. Such teachers must also not
be in default of a loan for which the borrower seeks
forgiveness. If teaching in a public elementary or secondary
school, such teachers must be fully qualified as defined in the
statue, and if teaching in a nonprofit private elementary or
secondary school or public charter school must meet alternative
criteria related to subject matter knowledge and teaching
skills as established and certified by the chief administrative
officer of the school.
Under section 3(b), the amount of loans which the secretary
of education may forgive may not exceed the sum of the
principal amounts outstanding (not to exceed $3,000) of the
individual's qualifying loans at the end of three consecutive
school years. An additional portion of such sum (not to exceed
$1,000) is available at the end of each of the following two
consecutive school years for such service not to exceed a total
loan forgiveness of $5,000.
Under section 3(c), the repayment to eligible lenders is
specified.
Under section 3(d), the applications and conditions of
repayment are set forth.
Under section 3(e), the treatment of consolidation loans is
addressed.
Under section 3(f) language is included which clarifies
that this program is to be carried out with funds made
available under section 414(c)(2) of the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
Section 4 of this bill provides October 1, 2000 as the
effective date for this act, and the amendments made by this
act.

Committee Views

In October 1998, the president signed the Omnibus
Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of
1999 (Public Law 105-277), encompassing the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998. The
ACWIA amended the Immigration and Nationality Act by
temporarily increasing the number of foreign-born skilled
workers allowed into the United States under H-1B visas, thus
allowing them to fill job openings in certain high demand
occupations. This increase was in response to concerns from the
business community, particularly the high tech community, that
there were not enough qualified professionals to fill key jobs,
raising the possibility for some companies to move to foreign
locations in order to expand.
Specifically, the ACWIA raised the cap on H-1B visas from
65,000 to 115,000 for fiscal years 1999 and 2000. For 2001, the
cap was reduced to 107,500 and then reduced again back to the
original level of 65,000 thereafter. As part of the changes
made through the ACWIA, Congress established a $500 fee upon
employers for each H-1B worker they hired. This fee generated
approximately $75 million in FY2000. The act directed these
fees to a H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account in order to fund
a variety of education and job training related activities.
Specifically, 56.3 percent of these funds were directed to the
secretary of labor for ``demonstration programs and projects
described in section 414(c) of the ACWIA,'' a freestanding
section of that act.
With funds made available to the Department of Labor over
the past two years through this account, there has been one
completed round of competitive grants totaling $12 million, to
local workforce investment boards for a variety of training
initiatives. Another round, totaling $40 million, will be
completed in late spring of 2000.
The 1999 cap on H-1B visas was reached in just six months--
demonstrating strong demand for skilled workers, especially in
the high-tech industry. This need has also been fueled by an
extremely low unemployment rate. These factors are coupled with
the reality that our education and workforce development
systems are not keeping pace with the needs of our nation's
economy. The Committee believes it is imperative that we
continue to improve these systems if we are truly to address
the unmet demand for skilled workers.
In response, there is growing support for legislation to
increase the caps on H-1B visas. It is the Committee's intent
that any efforts to do so include a continued commitment to
fund effective job training activities administered through the
recently reformed workforce system developed under the
bipartisan WIA.
This commitment is reflected under H.R. 4402, the Training
and Education for American Workers Act of 2000. This
legislation reinforces the view that any job training funds
provided under the Immigration and Nationality Act be
distributed through the Department of Labor and the local
workforce system established under WIA. In doing so, the
legislation also strengthens the current job training
provisions to ensure these funds are used effectively and
increase the number of workers in the United States with the
skills necessary to be employed in the high skilled, high wage
jobs which are being filled through H-1B workers--or more
often, simply not being filled.

Local Workforce Investment Boards

The Committee believes it is important for any funds
directed for job training from the H-1B petitioner account be
tied to local workforce investment boards established under
WIA. These business led boards are charged with ensuring
federal job training programs are responsive to the needs of
local employers and that federally funded training provides
recipients with skills that are in demand. By July 2000, when
all states must be in compliance with WIA, these boards will
have replaced private industry councils (PICs) established
under the Job Training Partnership Act that was consolidated
along with related programs under WIA. Unlike PICs, the new
boards will not administer or run programs--a task not suited
for a business led advisory board. Instead, the new boards will
bring together leading local business and community leaders to
provide direction and oversee these job-training programs to
ensure they are effective.
Tying these programs to the local workforce investment
system not only seeks to meet the needs of local employers, but
also ensures that funds are tied into the overall workforce
investment system at the local level. This new system, overseen
by the local boards, includes improved local access for
services to those seeking employment or skills upgrading and
for local employers seeking job applicants.

Expanded Opportunity for Business Participation

Although the Committee recognizes the importance of local
workforce investment boards to be actively involved in programs
funded under this part, the Committee believes it is equally
important to ensure the needs of a wide range of employers is
met--including employers not represented on local boards.
It is for this reason that H.R. 4402 enables business led
consortia to apply for these funds, in conjunction with local
boards. For example, a group of technology firms, recognizing
the wide demand for skills in a particular occupation, may join
together and propose a model job training program to recruit
and train individuals for these positions. Such consortia would
work with the local board in submitting an application for
funds, while allowing such consortia to manage the project or
deliver the services, as well as act as the fiscal agent. The
Committee notes the ability for such consortia to establish
programs for their existing workforce, in particular those
employees who may have the capacity, but not the specific
skills to fill job openings in occupations in demand and are
otherwise being left unfilled or being filled by H-1B visas
holders.

Expanded Training Opportunities

H.R. 4402 encourages local workforce investment boards and
consortia receiving these funds to serve individuals
traditionally underrepresented in the information technology
workforce. The Committee notes that this does not serve as a
limitation on who may be served under this program and should
not be viewed as an eligibility requirement. Additionally, it
is not the intent to require additional paperwork for local
workforce investment boards and consortia. Nor shall this be
considered an exhaustive list of individuals underrepresented
in these fields.

Loan Forgiveness

As part of the Higher Education Amendments of 1998,
Congress created a loan forgiveness program for all qualified
teachers. Specifically, such teachers must be new borrowers as
of October 1, 1998, and teach in high poverty schools receiving
Title I funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
for a minimum of five years regardless of what subject they
teach.
H.R. 4402 expands on the concept of loan forgiveness for
teachers and creates a new program for mathematics, science and
kindergarten through third grade reading teachers regardless of
where they teach. Targeting loan forgiveness to teachers who
teach these particular subjects is in direct response to the
nationwide shortage of qualified teachers in these areas. The
Committee notes that in addition to this new program and the
existing loan forgiveness program, students who receive Perkins
Loans under part E of Title IV of the Higher Education Act also
receive loan forgiveness if they teach in a school that
receives Title I funds under the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act.
The combined impact of these three loan forgiveness
programs will be significant for many of our nation's teachers.
A teacher who received the average Perkins Loan for four years
of college and who teaches any subject in a Title I school will
receive $6,000 in loan cancellation under the Perkins Loan
Program over a period of five years. If that same teacher has
loans under parts B or D of Title IV, he or she will receive
$5,000 in loan forgiveness after completing five years of
teaching.
By creating this new program, that same teacher will be
eligible for an additional $5,000 in loan forgiveness if he or
she teaches math, science or reading in any school in the
country. This one teacher may receive as much as $16,000 in
loan forgiveness.
Not only will students in high poverty schools be served by
qualified teachers, but the overall number of teachers in high
need subject areas will be increased in schools nation-wide as
a result of these three loan programs.

No Set Authorization

It is the Committee's intent that funding for this program
come solely from the transfer of funds from the Department of
Labor. The Committee does not intend a separate authorization
of appropriations for this program.

Section-by-Section

Section 1. Short Title. Sets forth the short title for this
legislation.
Section 2. Use of H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Fees. Amends
Section 414(c) of the American Competitiveness and Workforce
Improvement Act of 1998 as follows: ``Directs the secretary of
labor to establish demonstration programs or projects and
provide grants for the purpose of skills training for workers
for any skill shortage as demonstrated by the number of H-1B
visas issued in a field. Additionally, this section reserves
funds to be transferred to the secretary of education for the
purpose of loan forgiveness for mathematics, science or reading
teachers.''
Section 3. Loan Forgiveness Program for Mathematics,
Science, and Reading Teachers. Directs the secretary of
education to provide loan forgiveness to qualified teachers.
Section 4. Effective Date. Provides the date in which this
act shall take effect.

Explanation of Amendments

The Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute is explained in
the body of this report.

Application of Law to the Legislative Branch

Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a
description of the application of this bill to the legislative
branch. This bill, H.R. 4402, the Training and Education for
American Workers Act of 2000, is to improve the use of funds
accumulated by the H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account for
demonstration programs and projects to provide technical skills
training for occupations for which there is a high demand for
skilled workers. The bill does not prevent legislative branch
employees from receiving the benefits of this legislation.

Unfunded Mandate Statement

Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act (as amended by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, P.L. 104-4) requires a statement of
whether the provisions of the reported bill include unfunded
mandates. The purpose of H.R. 4402, the Training and Education
for American Workers Act of 2000, is to improve the use of
funds accumulated by the H-1B Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account
for demonstration programs and projects to provide technical
skills training for occupations for which there is a high
demand for skilled workers. As such, the bill does not contain
any unfunded mandates.

Roll Call Votes

Clause 3(b) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee Report to include for
each record vote on a motion to report the measure or matter
and on any amendments offered to the measure or matter the
total number of votes for and against and the names of the
Members voting for and against.

Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee

In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause
(2)(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee's oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect to
requirements of 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House of
Representatives and section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate
for H.R. 4402 from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office:

U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 18, 2000.
Hon. William F. Goodling,
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4402, the Training
and Education for American Workers Act of 2000.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Christina
Hawley Sadoti (for Department of Labor costs), and Deborah
Kalcevic (for Department of Education costs).
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson.
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.

H.R. 4402--Training and Education for American Workers Act of 2000

Summary: H.R. 4402 would amend the American Competitiveness
and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 to require that a portion
of the visa fees collected under current law and reserved for
the Department of Labor (DOL) would be spent by the Department
of Education (ED) on loan forgiveness activities. Although net
spending of those fees would not change over the 2001-2005
period, variations in spending patterns by DOL and ED would
result in some year-to-year outlay differences relatives to
spending under current law. As spending under these programs is
considered mandatory, these changes would be subject to pay-as-
you-go procedures.
The bill also would authorize a loan forgiveness program to
be operated by ED, subject to the availability of appropriated
funds. CBO estimates that full implementation of this provision
would cost $315 million over the 2001-2005 period. CBO
estimates that $12 million of that cost would come from the
transfer of fees to be collected in 2001 under current law; all
remaining costs for loan forgiveness would require new
appropriations.
H.R. 4402 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
Any costs to state or local governments as a result of
enactment of the bill would be incurred voluntarily, as a
condition of financial assistance.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 4402 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 500
(education, employment training, and social services).

Estimated Budget Authority...................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays............................................... 0 10 -4 -4 -1 0

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Estimated Authorization Level................................... 0 63 55 65 70 70
Estimated Outlays............................................... 0 55 48 60 70 70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basis of Estimate

For the purposes of this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R.
4402 will be enacted by the end of fiscal year 2000, and that
necessary funds to implement the bill will be appropriated
beginning in 2001.

Direct Spending

H.R. 4402 would amend provisions relating to job training
demonstration programs authorized under the American
Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998. Under
that act, a percentage of fees paid by petitioners for non-
immigrant work visas are used by DOL on grants for job training
aimed at improving technical skills of the American workforce.
H.R. 4402 would add new requirements to the grant programs--
making them available to business consortia as well as
governmental and nonprofit providers, and requiring grantees to
provide matching funds of at least 25 percent of the total
grant amount awarded. CBO estimates that these changes would
have a negligible effect on federal outlays over the 2001-2005
period.
Under the bill, DOL would keep 75 percent of the allotment
provided under current law. The other 25 percent would be
transferred to ED for a loan forgiveness program (described in
detail under the following section on spending subject to
appropriation). CBO estimates that, under current law, DOL will
receive $48 million in fees in fiscal year 2001 that would be
used for job training activities. If this bill is enacted, DOL
would keep $36 million and transfer $12 million to ED. Although
the total amount of funds spent by the federal government over
the 2001-2005 period would not change, there would be some
change in spending patterns relative to current law.
Loan forgiveness activities are estimated as changes in
credit program subsidies that are recorded when existing loans
are modified or when new loans are disbursed. Consequently,
outlays would be recorded faster for this program than for job
training activities, resulting in a net increase in spending of
$10 million in fiscal year 2001, followed by net reductions in
spending over the next three fiscal years. The fees that are
used to fund these activities are currently authorized only
through 2001.

Spending Subject to Appropriation

The new loan forgiveness program that H.R. 4402 would
establish is aimed at certain elementary and secondary school
teachers. Under the bill, qualifying teachers who were new
borrowers of federal student loans after 1998 could have up to
$5,000 of student loan debt paid off by the federal government.
Qualifying teachers include full-time elementary school
instructors who provide reading instruction to students through
the third grade, and other elementary and secondary school
teachers who are full-time instructors in mathematics, science,
and related fields. After three consecutive years of teaching
in these fields, up to $3,000 of federal student loan debt
would be forgiven, with an additional $1,000 per year for the
fourth and fifth consecutive years.
Based on data on teachers from the National Center for
Education Statistics, CBO estimates that about one-quarter of
the 2.7 million elementary and secondary school teachers would
eventually meet the instructional and tenure requirements of
the proposed program, but only about 40 percent of those
teachers would have outstanding student loan debt covered under
the program. Because the program would be phased in by limiting
participation to new student loan borrowers after 1998 and only
after those borrowers have been hired and then taught for a
minimum of three consecutive years, it would be many years
before the program is fully implemented. By 2005, an estimated
25,000 teachers would be eligible to receive some debt
forgiveness.
Program costs associated with the new loan forgiveness
program are assessed under the requirements of the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990. As such, the costs associated with
loan forgiveness are recorded on a present-value basis in the
year an existing loan is modified or a new loan is disbursed to
the borrower. The costs of changes to 1999 and 2000 loans are
shown in the table in 2001--when CBO assumes appropriations
would first be provided.
CBO estimates that full funding requirements of the program
authorized under H.R. 4402 would be $75 million in 2001 which
covers the cost of loans disbursed to borrowers in 1999, 2000,
and 2001, and $335 million over the 2001-2005 period. Of the
estimated $335 million in funding costs through 2005, $12
million would be supplied through the visa fees, but the rest
would be subject to annual appropriations.
H.R. 4402's language about the source of the funding for
this program creates some uncertainty about the bill's scope.
One possible interpretation is that the program's funding would
be limited to only the amount of visa fees transferred from DOL
to ED. If that were the case, then H.R. 4402 would create a
program that would be authorized only for 2001 (or for
subsequent years, should the Congress extend the fee
authority). Because the bill does not specifically limit the
program to 2001 and because it does not restrict funding of
loan forgiveness costs to just the transferred fees, however,
CBO assumes--for the purposes of this estimate--that additional
funding for the program would be provided through annual
appropriations to cover potential costs in addition to those
covered by the transfer of fees.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures
for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. The net
changes in outlays that are subject to pay-as-you-go procedures
are shown in the following table. For the purposes of enforcing
pay-as-you-go procedures, only the effects in the current year,
the budget year, and the succeeding four years are counted.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays................. 0 10 -4 -4 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Changes in receipts................ (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹) (¹)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Non-applicable.

Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments:
H.R. 4402 contains on intergovernmental mandates as defined in
UMRA. The bill would make grants available to local workforce
investment boards, or a consortia of boards, to provide
programs that train certain workers in skills that are in short
supply in various technology fields. New grant conditions would
require recipients to match at least 25 percent of the grant
award. Any costs to state or local governments as a result of
enactment of the bill would be incurred voluntarily, as a
condition of financial assistance.
Estimated impact on the private sector: H.R. 4402 contains
no private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: DOL Costs--Christina
Hawley Sadoti. ED Costs--Deborah Kalcevic.
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Susan Seig
Tompkins.
Impact on the Private Sector: Ralph Smith.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.

Statement of Oversight Findings of the Committee on Government Reform

With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform on the
subject of H.R. 4402.

Constitutional Authority Statement

Under clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Committee must include a statement
citing the specific powers granted to Congress in the
Constitution to enact the law proposed by H.R. 4402. The
Committee believes that the amendments made by this bill to the
American Competitiveness and Workforce Investment Act (ACWIA)
of 1998 are within Congress' authority under Article I, section
8, clause 1 of the Constitution.

Committee Estimate

Clauses 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the
Committee of the costs that would be incurred in carrying out
H.R. 4402. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides
that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has
included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the
bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act.

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):

SECTION 414 OF THE AMERICAN COMPETITIVENESS AND WORKFORCE IMPROVEMENT
ACT OF 1998

SEC. 414. COLLECTION AND USE OF H-1B NONIMMIGRANT FEES FOR SCHOLARSHIPS
FOR LOW-INCOME MATH, ENGINEERING, AND COMPUTER
SCIENCE STUDENTS AND JOB TRAINING OF UNITED STATES
WORKERS.

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

[(c) Demonstration Programs and Projects To Provide Technical
Skills Training for Workers.--
[(1) In general.--In establishing demonstration
programs under section 452(c) of the Job Training
Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1732(c)), as in effect on
the date of the enactment of this Act, or demonstration
programs or projects under section 171(b) of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998, the Secretary of
Labor shall use funds available under section 286(s)(2)
to establish demonstration programs or projects to
provide technical skills training for workers,
including both employed and unemployed workers.
[(2) Grants.--The Secretary of Labor shall award
grants to carry out the programs and projects described
in paragraph (1) to--
[(A)(i) private industry councils established
under section 102 of the Job Training
Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. 1512), as in effect
on the date of the enactment of this Act; or
[(ii) local boards that will carry out such
programs or projects through one-stop delivery
systems established under section 121 of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998; or
[(B) regional consortia of councils or local
boards described in subparagraph (A).]
(c) Demonstration Programs and Projects To Provide Technical
Skills Training for Workers; Loan Forgiveness for Mathematics,
Science, and Reading Teachers.--
(1) Technical skills training for workers.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary of Labor shall
use 75 percent of the funds made available
under section 286(s)(2) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1356(s)(2)) to
establish demonstration programs or projects to
provide technical skills training for employed
and unemployed workers for any skill shortage
related to a specialty occupation (as defined
in section 214(i)(1) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(i)(1)).
(B) Grants.--The Secretary of Labor shall
award grants to carry out programs or projects
described in subparagraph (A) to--
(i) local workforce investment boards
established under section 117 of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29
U.S.C. 2832);
(ii) regional consortia of local
boards described in clause (i); or
(iii) in conjunction with, and with
the active participation of, local
boards described in clause (i),
consortia (which may be local,
regional, or multistate consortia)--
(I) a majority of whose
members are a business or
represent a business; and
(II) whose membership may
include representatives of
State and local governments,
community-based organizations
(as defined in section 101 of
the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801)),
educational institutions, and
labor organizations (for a
local area, as defined in such
section 101, in which employees
are represented by labor
organizations), nominated by
local labor federations, or
(for a local area, as so
defined, in which no employees
are represented by such
organizations), other
representatives of employees.
(C) Priority projects.--In awarding grants
under subparagraph (B), the Secretary of Labor
shall give priority to programs or projects
that train employed and unemployed workers in
skills that are in shortage in the high
technology, information technology, and
biotechnology fields, including software and
communications services, telecommunications,
systems installation and integration, computers
and communications hardware, health care
technology, biotechnology, and biomedical
research, manufacturing, and innovation
services.
(D) Grant application requirements.--An
application for a grant under this paragraph
shall include--
(i) specific goals for each program
or project for which funds are sought,
including targets for measurable
increases in skill gains for those
individuals being trained under the
program or project; and
(ii) an agreement that the program or
project shall be subject to evaluations
by the Secretary of Labor to measure
its effectiveness.
(E) Matching funds.--Each grantee receiving
funds under this paragraph shall demonstrate
the manner by which the grantee will provide
matching resources (in the form of cash, in-
kind contributions, or both) equal to at least
25 percent of the total grant amount awarded.
(F) Target population.--Each grantee
receiving funds under this paragraph shall make
efforts actively to recruit and train
individuals who traditionally are
underrepresented in information technology
occupations, such as minorities, women, low-
wage workers, workers residing in empowerment
zones and enterprise communities (as defined in
section 1393(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986), and individuals with a disability.
(2) Loan forgiveness for mathematics, science, and
reading teachers.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Secretary of Labor shall
transfer to the Secretary of Education 25
percent of the funds made available to the
Secretary of Labor under section 286(s)(2) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1356(s)(2)).
(B) Use of funds.--The Secretary of Education
shall use funds made available under
subparagraph (A) to carry out section 3 of the
Training and Education for American Workers Act
of 2000.

* * * * * * *

ADDITIONAL VIEWS

In response to the soaring demand by the business community
for technologically skilled workers, the Congress is once again
considering legislation to increase the numbers of foreign
workers that may enter the country and fill high-tech jobs. If
an increase is to be granted, it is imperative that we also
secure and build on the job training and educational programs
currently in place to increase the competitiveness of American
workers.
The American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act
of 1998 (Title IV of P.L. 105-277, the Omnibus Appropriations
Act for FY 1999) was intended to strike such a balance. The Act
raised limits on H-1B visas. It imposed user fees on H-1B visa
applicants. It required the fees to be used for grants awarded
by the Department of Labor to fund the training of American
workers for high-technology jobs. The Act also funded
scholarships through the National Science Foundation for low-
income students to pursue degress in math, computer science,
and engineering.
H.R. 4402, the Training and Education for American Workers
Act, makes modest improvements in the H-1B Technical Skills
Training Grant program administered by the Department of Labor.
It also expands the student loan forgiveness program, with a
special emphasis on math, science, and reading teachers.
H.R. 4402 is a bipartisan bill that includes key provisions
requested by our members. The bill creates a priority for
projects that train workers for the specific occupations that
are the subject of the majority of the H-1B applications. The
bill requires grant applicants to specify the skill gains their
trainees are expected to realize. The bill addresses the
``digital divide'' by requiring grantees to actively recruit
and train those workers who have been traditionally
underrepresented in high-tech jobs--minorities, women, the
disabled, and low-income workers. It establishes a 25% non-
federal matching requirement. And finally, the bill includes a
loan forgiveness program for math, science, and reading
teachers. While each of the provisions in H.R. 4402 represents
an important step forward, we believe that even more could have
been done to increase the overall program's effectiveness.
First, the committee missed the opportunity to recognize
labor-management partnerships as an instrument through which
innovative and effective training programs could be
implemented. Many labor organizations and employers across the
nation have successfully launched initiatives to change the
skill-base of the domestic workforce. During negotiations
preceding the committee's mark-up, we sought the inclusion of a
provision expressly permitting equal business--labor
partnerships to serve as grantees. Regrettably, the Republican
majority rejected it, insisting that all grantees be business-
led entities--such as local workforce investment boards, or
business-led consortia. Democrats were successful, however, in
winning approval during the mark-up of two amendments that
improved the accountability for funds spent under the Act, and
increased participation of employees and community
organizations in the corsortia.
The bill also included an expansion of the loan forgiveness
program, a provision that was included in the bill at the
request of Representative Roemer. The provision requires the
Secretary of Labor to transfer 25% of funds collected from H-1B
fees to the Secretary of Education to fund student loan
forgiveness. The provsion provides up to $3,000 in student loan
forgiveness for science, math and reading teachers who teach 3
years in elementary and secondary school, and up to $1,000 in
the 4th and 5th years of teaching. It requires public school
teachers to be fully qualified in order to become eligible for
loan forgiveness; the benefits are designed to supplement the
loan forgiveness provisions in the Higher Education Act.
The bill as introduced limited loan forgiveness to teachers
who teach in Title I schools. Title I schools have
significantly more difficulty recruiting highly qualified
teachers; this was recognized in the bipartisan reauthorization
of the Higher Education Act, which provided up to $5,000 loan
forgiveness for teachers who teach in poor schools for 5 years.
Unfortunately, the Majority weakened the loan forgiveness
provision in committee by refusing to give priority to teachers
who teach in Title I schools.
The Republican majority opposes an authorization for loan
forgiveness, and wants to limit the program to H1-B fees
generated and transferred to the Department of Education.
According to the data provided by the Congressional Budget
Office, this would severely limit the effectiveness and scope
of this supplemental loan forgiveness program. According to the
CBO, approximately 25,000 teachers would be eligible to receive
loan forgiveness under H.R. 4402 through fiscal year 2005, at a
cost of $335 million. However, the H1-B fees alone would
provide only $12 million for loan forgiveness; this would fund
loan forgiveness for less than 1,000 teachers cumulatively
through fiscal year 2005. We suppport a separate authorization
for this loan forgiveness program, so all eligible teachers
have the opportunity to receive supplemental loan forgiveness
benefits under this act.
We note that another pending and bipartisan H-1B bill, H.R.
3983 (introduced by Representatives Drier and Lofgren), would
transfer the technical skills training grant program from the
Department of Labor to the Department of Commerce. The members
of this committee, the Clinton Administration, and AFL-CIO all
oppose this transfer. As H.R. 4402 moves forward through the
legislative process, and is considered in conjunction with
related H-1B legislation, this committee should continue to
assert its jurisdiction over both the H-1B skills training
grant and educational programs, and oppose their removal from
the agencies that are now effectively managing them.
We also support the amendment offered by Representative
Kind that would provide additional support for Upward Bound, a
program that provides comprehensive support services to low-
income students, in critical areas such as mathematics and
science. We urge the Majority to make good on its promise to
work with us on this initiative.
William L. Clay.
Dale E. Kildee.
Major R. Owens.
Patsy T. Mink.
Tim Roemer.
Lynn Woolsey.
Chaka Fattah.
Carolyn McCarthy.
Ron Kind.
Harold E. Ford, Jr.
David Wu.
George Miller.
Matthew G. Martinez.
Robert E. Andrews.
Robert C. Scott.
Carlos Romero-Barcelo
John F. Tierney.
Dennis J. Kucinich.
Rush Holt.

DISSENTING VIEWS OF RON PAUL

Congress should reject HR 4402, the ``Training and
Education for American Workers Act of 2000,'' as this bill uses
fees from the H-1B program to strengthen an unconstitutional
attempt to centrally plan the job training system. While the
job training system certainly needs improvement, increasing the
federal role in job training will not accomplish this worthy
goal. Instead, Congress should return control over job training
resources to the American people by passing large tax cuts and
tax credits.
A particularly objectionable feature of this bill is its
reliance on Local Workforce Investment Boards. These boards,
which were created by Congress in 1997, represent a form of
corporatism that has been discredited everywhere it has been
tried. As I wrote about the Workforce Development Boards at the
time of their creation:
``* * * because business-dominated workforce development
boards will determine which occupations are in demand, it is
very likely that the businesses represented on the board will
be the ones determined to be those `for which there is a demand
in the local workforce.'
Second, and more importantly, the very idea that a
government board can somehow determine what occupations will be
in demand at any point in the future is an example of what
Nobel Laureate F.A. Hayek called `The Fatal Conceit.' No
central board, even one dominated by local officials and
businessmen, can predict which jobs will be in demand in five,
ten, or even two years. It is doubtful that a ``local workforce
board'' in Silicon Valley in 1978 would have tried to link job
training services to the personal computer market. In fact,
it's highly unlikely that Steve Jobs (founder of Apple
computers), would be appointed to the workforce development
board in Silicon Valley. The very fact that the boards are
comprised of already established leaders for business
practically assures that the entrepreneurs creating the jobs of
the future will not be represented on this board. In this high-
tech information age, where financial and, more importantly,
intellectual capital, can travel around the world in a matter
of seconds, the jobs in demand in any area can change faster
than any geographical local workforce board could conceivably
update the skills with which to link job-training.''
This bill not only reinforces the flawed system established
in 1997, it once again commits ``The Fatal Conceit'' by
singling out training for certain occupations as ``priority
projects.'' Congress has neither the constitutional authority
nor the competence to single out priority occupations, instead,
the determination of what occupations deserve priority should
be left to the greatest job-creation and wealth-enhancing
process known in human history: the free market. Congress
should promote a free-market in job training by cutting taxes
on employers and employees so they may devote more of their own
resources toward training for the jobs they have determined are
in demand. I am cosponsoring several pieces of legislation to
provide tax cuts and tax credits for job training, such as HR
1824, the Skilled Workforce Enhancement Act and HR 838, which
provide tax credits for high technology training. If my
colleagues wish to use fees collected from the H-1B visa
program to enhance job training they should use this money to
``offset'' the loss of revenue from these pro-worker tax cuts.
In conclusion, Congress should reject these attempts to use
H-1B visas fees to further an unconstitutional and inefficient
attempt to centrally plan job training. Instead, Congress
should embrace a free-market approach to job training by
putting education resources in the hands of the American people
so that they may determine what are the economy's ``priority
projects.''