Transcripts For CSPAN3 Labor Secretary Acosta Testifies On FY 2018 Budget Request 20170721

Before this committee today to discuss your departments fiscal 2018 budget request. As you know, the budget is significantly challenged in terms of the cuts in your department. I think the proposed cuts of 2. 3 billion are about onefifth of the departments operating level. Certainly while i appreciate and many of us appreciate the departments prioritizing limited resources and making decisions to realign programs, the fundamental question is really what you choose to cut and whether you can possibly look at that number and make an argument as to why that much of your previous budget should be cut this year. Its not the first time these kinds of cuts have come in the department. Last year president obama proposed about the same level of cuts, though he proposed somehow these programs would lean heavily on new mandatory spending to bypass what were the actual budget caps in the law then. Of course, those budget caps are in the law still. Instead of making difficult decisions of prioritizing, it would have been easier according to the last administration to just have new mandatory programs. This year the department has submitted a budget that so significantly cuts programs or eliminates them altogether, its really hard for us to figure out your priorities. We look forward to visiting with you about that. I have serious concerns about the worker training reductions, particularly the proposal to cut state grants by 40 and close Job Corps Centers. The president has recognized there are millions of jobs in the country that dont have workers with the skills to take those jobs. We need to make certain our workforce Training Programs and Apprenticeship Programs equip individuals with the skills they need to meet the Workforce Needs of today and tomorrow. While there are no easy answers when it comes to budget limitations, im concerned reducing funding so much and so suddenly and particularly taking so much of that from worker training would further jeopardize our Workforce Development efforts and our ability to compete with and for better jobs and stronger families. As the fy 2018 appropriations process moves forward, its my hope to Work Together with you and everyone on this committee to identify priorities, find Common Ground and how to best spend the taxpayer money that were given responsibility for. Mr. Secretary, i look forward to your testimony. But first id like to go to senator murray for her opening remarks. Thank you very much, chairman blunt. Welcome secretary acosta. Before we talk about this, what i think is an indefensible budget request, i want to reiterate today how appalling it is that we are potentially, if not hours away, from voting on legislation that would spike Health Care Costs for patients nationwide and kick millions of people off of coverage as we have now seen with the cbo numbers. Yet Senate Republicans have yet to hold a single hearing or any kind of open public debate under regular order. Now that weve seen it, its pretty easy to see why. This is going to be a devastating bill and have a tremendous impact on patients and families. So we on this side remain deeply concerned about that. Now, this committee has a history of working together in a bipartisan manner. I sincerely open my colleagues will remember that and urge their leadership to hold open transparent process so people have time to understand what is in store for their health and financial secretary. Secretary acosta, while trumpcare has huge implications for our nations workforce and i plan on asking about that, i first want to address the deeply harmful budget request that has been put forward. As im sure youre aware, connecting workers to sustainable jobs and employers to a Skilled Workforce has been department of labors Central Mission for decades. Thats because we know one of the surest paths to good paying jobs is investing in training and education form indemand skills. Our ability as a nation to attract and keep good jobs here at home and grow our economy will only be realized by tapping into the full potential of our workforce. On the campaign trail, candidate trump promised to put workers first. As president he has consistently pursued an anti worker agenda that benefits those at the top and leaves workers and families paying the price. In fact, the president s recently announced executive order on apprenticeships would loosen standards to make sure businesses getting federal workforce funds actually deliver results. Given the Trump Administrations pattern of lining the pockets of corporations and special interests at the expense of workers, its hard to see this executive order is anything but an another thinly veiled broken promise from the president who promised to put workers first but has failed to do so since day one. The president s budget for the department of labor doubles down on those broken promises. The budget completely disregards the overwhelmingly bipartisan enactment of the workforce innovation and opportunity act in 2014 where republicans and democrats came together to streamline the nations job Training Programs to make sure they are targeted, effective and built to last. Instead, President Trumps budget proposes deep cuts to those investments that provide over 20 million workers with 21st century skills they need to succeed in a rapidly changing global economy. The president s budget would mean that 9 million workers including dislocated coal miners and veterans would lose access to those Critical Services next year. Again, these are precisely the working families trump said he would support and protect during his campaign. Secretary acosta, although important Consumer Protections for those saving for retirement will go into effect tomorrow, i do remain concerned that you still intend to revise and weaken those protections, im hoping youll be similarly guide by the rule of law in addressing the over time rule. This is an opportunity to stand up to the white house when workers and family needs are on the line. I hope you take it. I do remain deeply concerned about President Trumps harmful agenda for workers and making sure they are safe and have security. Democrats are going to continue rigorous oversight to hold you, mr. Secretary, and the Administration Accountable for the damage done to worker safety, security and opportunity. I do hope republicans will join democrats in continuing to reject the devastating cuts in President Trumps Budget Proposal just as we did in fiscal year 2017 omnibus to continue robust investments in job Training Programs that coordinate with the efforts of key workforce partners, business leaders, workforce boards, labor unions, community colleges, nonprofits and state and local officials to make sure all workers can acquire the skills that they need to get a good job and climb the ladder of opportunity and grow the economy. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator murray. Glad to have the chairman of the full committee with us. Senator cochran, do you have anything youd like to start with . Mr. Chairman, i do have a couple questions. Lets get mr. Acostas testimony then and well go to questions after that. Secretary acosta, were glad youre here. The secretary is now serving in his fourth president ially appointed, senateconfirmed job. Most recently he served as dean of the Florida International University College of law. Secretary, were glad youre here. This is always a department where you have your hands full, but meeting the opportunities of the future is an important and we look forward to hearing you talk about that and this budget. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Ranking member murray, chairman cochran, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. Its an honor to appear before the committee to outline the administrations vision for the department of labor in fiscal 2018 and beyond. Supporting the ability of all americans to find good jobs and safe jobs is a priority for President Trump, and it is a priority for me. Im proud and i remain humbled in leading the department of labor in this critical work. Presently the Unemployment Rate in the United States is 4. 3 . That is a 16year low. One has to go back to 2001. This is great news. Another very important statistic, however is that there are presently 6 million job openings in the United States. That is the highest number since the department of labor started keeping records on open jobs. We can get more americans back to work if we match those who are looking for work with these available jobs. During my short time as secretary of labor, ive heard from many business leaders, governors, mayors and just americans, and they all say there is a skills gap. They tell me workers just dont have the right training to step into many of these vacant positions. The apprenticeship model is a good solution to narrowing the skills gap. As has been mentioned, it is bipartisan. President trump knows the value of apprenticeships from his many years of experience in the Building Trades. The president also knows that this is a model that works across Many Industries and should be expanded across industries both in terms of breadth and scale. High quality, and i emphasize high quality apprenticeships enable employers to be involved in training their future workforce so they can be sure new hires possess the skills needed to do the job. Its called demanddriven education. Apprentices who seek wages, and just importantly skills that enable them to thrive in todays workforce. They earn while they learn. According to the department of labor statistics, graduates of Apprenticeship Programs have a high average starting wage, 60,000, higher than the typical college graduate. They are likely to have a job upon completion of their program and often receive certificates recognizing their education that portable across industry. President trumps executive order on spending apprenticeship has the department of labor to pave the way for more apprenticeships. Getting americans back to work requires eliminating other programs that are less effective in helping americans get jobs. There are many programs intended to help americans find or train for jobs, but some are duplicative, unproven or ineffective. The department is committed to streamlining programs based on rigorous analysis of data to assess program effectiveness. The Department Also believes that giving states more flexibility to administer Department Resources in a way that best suits the state needs will ensure that resources are used as efficiently and effectively as possible. The department believes a vast majority of employers across the nation are responsible actors, fully committed to following Worker Protection laws. The department has placed priority in helping american employers understand and remain in compliance with those laws. But the department likewise takes very seriously its responsibility to enforce the law. Enforcement must go hand in hand with compliance assistance. Well vigorously enforce the law against wrongdoers. A good job should be a safe job. The budget includes funding increases of nearly 17 million to the departments Worker Protections agencies to support these goals. Well focus the department of labor on his core mission by making Smart Investments in programs that work. The budget makes hard but responsible choices. It eliminates programs that are less effective or less efficient and dedicates taxpayer dollars to those that we know that are successful. Americans want good and safe jobs. The department is here to support americans desire to gain and told these jobs. The budget restores the department to this fundamental mission, investing in programs known to be successful. The proposals are evidencebased and reflect the seriousness with which the administration is taking these responsibilities. Let me say in closing, i understand, mr. Chairman, your remarks, and i understand that going back year after year, the budget is a starting point. And as in the past, we look forward to working with your committee as we go forward on discussions regarding these issues. The focus has and will have to be on protecting americas workers. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Well have a fiveminute round of questions. Im sure there will be time for a second round if people have more than five minutes of time to use. If youd stay pretty close to that, and i know the chairman is here and has some questions. Ill ask my questions after senator kennedy. Ill come near the end. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, i understand the department is close to finalizing a memorandum of agreement with the city of gulfport regarding the rebuilding of the Job Corps Center in gulfport, mississippi. Can you update us on the status of that situation and share with the committee the estimated completion, if you know that, on the gulfport Job Corps Center . Mr. Chairman, i appreciate the question. The Department Remains committed to serving the youth of the gulfport community. We appreciate the support youve offered as its been important as we move forward. Were working with the consulting parties as we move forward on the memorandum of understanding. We anticipate that mou will be signed sometime this summer most likely, possibly within the next 60 days and it will be followed by the design and construction phase assume that the budget allows us to go forward. And if you would like, im more than happy to ensure the department keeps your staff up to date with the progress as those discussions continue. Thank you. Wed appreciate that. Let me also ask you to share with the committee the number of mississippi businesses and schools who have expressed concern about overburdensome and costly regulations including overtime, joint employer and fiduciary rules that have been issued by the department. Whats the department doing to evaluating complaints like that, particularly those that are Small Businesses in rural areas of our state . What are you doing to take steps, if any, to alleviate concerns about burdensome regulations by the Previous Administration . Mr. Chairman, i dont have the precise number of businesses and schools that have sent letters to the department. I will say this, the department has received correspondence from many business, not only in mississippi but around the nation regarding the burden on regulations. And the department is examining the regulations that are currently on the books. The department is working to ensure that the regulations that are presently in effect are necessary. To the extend some are outdated or unnecessary, the department will look at those regulations and determine how to proceed. Thank you, chairman. Senator murray. Thank you very much. Secretary acosta, as you know i am deeply disappointed as many are that trumpcare is planned to be jammed through the senate this week. Obviously from the cbo numbers, millions will lose their health insurance, costs will rise. As you probably know, this is going to have a devastating impact on jobs as well across the country in our Rural Communities where a lot of our rural hospitals are telling us because of the loss of dollars they will likely shut their doors as well as become much smaller, as well as the Nursing Homes telling us of the devastating impacts. Have you shared with the president any of those job loss numbers . Senator murray, i do not at present have specific job loss numbers with respect to the health care industry. Let me say this more generally. I think the issue is a little more complicated and a little more subtle. Because at the same time some jobs may be reduced, many other jobs may be created. One concern we have heard from employers is the financial burden imposed by high Health Care Costs. I have not seen any analysis that shows a job increase as a result of this bill, and i think that what we are hearing a lot of is the job losses. To me that is really deeply disconcerting. I hope your agency is sharing that with the president. Let me ask you about the job training cuts. A few weeks ago President Trump signed an executive order commemorating Workforce Development week. And what were seeing is it slashed programs by more than 2 billion. Those are programs that help millions of workers find jobs every year, the same workers the president promised to support. Experts estimate that your cuts would mean 9 million adult youth and dislocated workers and veterans will lose access to job training and states would lose over a billion dollars in direct support of worker training. That is a 40 cut to the nations job Training System that governors are telling us they cannot absorb. So i am really disappointed that these are in here. Ive heard you say that they are duplicative and ineffective. But not only did congress streamline Training Programs when we wrote the workforce innovation opportunity act, but evidence now shows that 80 of the adults find jobs after training. So tell me why this major cut is in this after Congress Work really hard, streamlined the bill, cut out the ineffective things and did it in a bipartisan way and now your budget cuts all the support for that . Senator, thank you for the question. Let me begin by thanking congress for its work. It was a bipartisan bill that took several important steps both in streamlining programs and in returning to the states funding so states could work with greater flexibility. The current budget proposes to further increase that flexibility to the states in how they can allocate their money which is an important action. Ultimately governors and localities are those that can provide that can best focus the money within their jurisdiction. Governors are telling us nationwide that they dont support this cut to these investments in job training. They say they dont have the availability to make up the federal dollars in their own budgets. They do not support this budget. As i was saying, senator, i understand, and so flexibility is certainly important. As the chairman indicated, the budget certainly, and historically the proposals have been have looked to reduce the spending because ultimately as a federal government, we need to find ways to reduce spending. These are taxpayer dollars. Im certainly willing to work with the committee as the committee looks at this more closely to discuss priorities and to discuss how to best proceed with respect to this budget. Let me say one last thing, as a general rule i think sometimes there is a tendency we all want metrics and we all judge success based on the level of spending. I see this in universities where universities sometimes judge their success by expenditures per student nobody is trying to do that here. What we have done and want to continue to do, invest in jobs in those communities to give people skills they need, and this budget doesnt do it. I am out of time. I have to tell you this isnt about dollars increase. This is about major cuts to people and their inability to get the skills they need. Thank you, senator murray. Senator alexander. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, welcome. Democrats have set some records for delaying President Trumps cabinet nominees. President trump is setting records for not sending up subcabinet nominees. Under president obama, ten had been sent by now, president bush had sent nine. We havent gotten the other one. When we going to get some more nominations for your department . Well, im, senator, mr. Chairman, i appreciate the question. I can, i can say this, im approaching my, my own 60day mark as secretary. I have set as a personal goal, to have the vast majority of my subdepartment leadership identified and in clearance by the 60day mark. I believe that that goal is something that can be reached. And then ultimately they do have to go through background check and clearance. I know, but i just would urge the white house, the president and you, this is the senates opportunity to confirm, to vet, to question these nominees. We can move them quickly through the committee. Let me go to a second. I want to ask you to respond to this i want to give you my opinion to consider on the socalled overtime rule. That was a bad rule. Here were the problems with it the rapid rate of increase. The salary threshold was set to double overnight. The top was 47,000, just too high for many parts of the country. I think it would be wise to consider different top level for different parts of the country it caused enormous harm to nonprofits, especially colleges and universities, who are telling me they would have to raise tuition by large amounts to accommodate it. It included annual increases with only two months notice. Now annual increases might be a good idea. But not with two months notice. So i would urge you to, to show us how to write a good overtime regulation, as you consider this. One that takes those issues into account. And there are thousands and thousands of colleges, university, boy scout troops, businesses, that hope you will do the same. My question is, about your apprenticeship order. I salute your interest in that. And the president s interests in it and look forward to supporting it. I have one question about it. The executive order allows you to deny access to the expansion of the Apprenticeship Program for certain sectors that already have effective and widespread effectiveship Apprenticeship Programs. Is that directed at the Construction Industry . Do you plan to exempt the Construction Industry from your executive order . Thank you, for the comments and the questions. Let me say going to your earlier comments that this morning the department of labor transmitted to omb a request for information regarding the overtime rule, once approved by omb, that request would ask the public to comment on a number of questions, that would inform our thinking with respect to many of the issues that you raised. Now moving to the president s executive order, the president is well familiar with the apprenticeships, particularly in the Building Trades, and is aware of the success of apprenticeships in the Building Trades. Associated builders and contractors, says there are 500,000 unfilled jobs for construction workers. Why would you consider exempting the Construction Industry . So senator. If you are . If i can comment on that. The executive order provides the secretary of labor, with discretion to look at particular industries. And if the Current Program is effective and widespread, its a do no harm provision where if a program is currently working and would not benefit, from wider expansion, then there is discretion to not fix what is not broken. And so, regulations will have to be presented, that, that implement that, and those regulations would govern how that particular provision works. I understand that, but do you have an intention to exempt the bill, the Construction Industry at this moment . Senator, i have an intention to create regulations that will provide rules for the road on how that provision will be adopted. My time is i have nine seconds, but in that nine seconds, if there are 500,000 unfilled jobs for construction workers today, i would hope they wouldnt, hope that would be evidence that theres program for Apprenticeship Programs in the Construction Industry. We would degree. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator, senator shots . Thank you for being here and for your good work. Many people from this administration have attacked the bureau of labor statistics. As phony, fictitious and a hoax when they dont like the data that is presented to them. At a rally in iowa last december, the president elect said the unemployment number as you know is totally fiction and a few months earlier. He says you hear 5 Unemployment Rate. Its just a phony number. This march. The omb director mulvaney even accused the Obama Administration of manipulating the numbers to make the Unemployment Rate look smaller. These are really dangerous attacks on Government Data generally and your department in particular. I know youre a datadriven leader and so i want to ask you, the bureau of labor statistics has existed for more than 130 years to provide independent, unbiased and rigorous data on employment levels in the country. Lawmakers use it for policymaking, journalists and researchers use it to accurately inform the public and these attacks degrade the public trust. So i want to give you as much leeway as possible. Because i understand you work for the Trump Administration this is not a setup question in order to get you sideways with any member of your administration. Because i would like to hear from you what you think about the bureau of labor statistics. Their accuracy, no just under your leadership, but over time. Senator, i appreciate the question. And let me guess make my three points. First all the statistical agencies within the government, not just the bureau of labor statistics, but there are several. About half a dozen statistical agencies. Are serve an incredibly important role. And in fact, they have particular protections that are given them by omb, to safeguard them from administration, to administration. And those important protections because the data that they produce is used over time by researchers and setting policy. And i think its very important to protect the integrity of that data. One of the issues coming out of bls is there are actually six measures of unemployment. That bls produces. At least six and then several submeasures. Some of which are more narrow and some of which are broader. And so sometimes when folks refer to the Unemployment Rate which as i just did, earlier today, of 4. 3 , i was referring to the u3 figure. Theres the u6 figure which is broader, which is about 8. 4, which includes underemployment generally and we have the labor fors participation rate. Which unfortunately keeps dropping and just from demographic changes, just from the aging of america, would drop by approximately. 3 per year. If we dont do more to bring folks into the labor force. And so i think sometimes when folks challenge the number, whats really going on is particular numbers measure those things that theyre intended to measure. They do so so professionally. But what they measure may not necessarily be what is being discussed. So we have a very low Unemployment Rate. But we need to get more americans back to work. And if you look at the Labor Force Participation rate, enough americans arent working, theyve given up. And so the, the multiplicity of numbers can sometimes create confusion. I just ask, and i understand that point. And i giving the benefit of the doubt to some of the political leaders who, who characterize the numbers in a way to make their point. And sometimes a valid point. Sometimes a point in the context of an election. But thats all fair game. What i want to be assured of is the secretary of labor stands up for not just his department and not just bls. But generally for the agencies that collect data. Because theres something more insidious going on. If the only point thats being made is hey look, its a low Unemployment Rate. But that doesnt tell you the whole story. Fair enough. But if people are being told by their leaders at the highest level that the government is lying to them, thats a whole different proposition. And it is your job to stand up and create these data sets. I deeply respect the integrity and the importance of data sets. Set policy. By senators like yourself and others here. And i hear your point. Thank you, senator schatz, senator langford. Good to see you again. Thank you for your continued service. Can you give me insight on path forward on the joint employer. And the ongoing conversation with the department of labor. I can do so the department of labor has withdrawn the guidance that had been previously issued on the joint employer. That guidance had been issued in january of 2016. And discussed the agencys rejection of the common law concepts. So that guidance is no longer in effect within the department of labor now. The National Labor Relations Board as the senator is aware, doesnt come within the department of labors jurisdiction. Chairman alexander earlier referenced the National Labor Relations Board and pending nominations. And the National Labor Relations Board fills i would suspect thats an issue that they will have to take up and decide how to proceed. Great so everything is on hold at this point. Pending that . Well the department of labor, the guidance has been withdrawn. So that is the portion of the issue that is within the jurisdiction of the department of labor. Talking about the fiduciary rule. You have to have cooperation with another entity, the s. E. C. To try to figure out how this is going to work. Where is the conversation running now . So previously the s. E. C. Did not work jointly with the department of labor. As i indicated quite publicly. I think that the s. E. C. Has important expertise and that they need to be part of the conversation. And i ask that the chairman of the s. E. C. If the s. E. C. Would be willing to work with us. And the chairman indicated his willingness to do so. And its my hope as the s. E. C. Also receive as full compliment of commissioners that the s. E. C. Will continue to work with the department of labor on this issue. Okay. You mentioned in your Opening Statement about enforcement. And this committee i would tell you would expect that. That if there are safety issues, we want to be able to maintain enforcement. The law is there for a reason and we wont be able to maintain it. Would you go back as far as the Clinton Administration when al gore led an effort across the nation in working with regulators to try to bring down the tone of the regulators and those inspectors that are coming in. Cy hear pretty consistently that folks used to come in, to help us, now they come in to fine us. Especially from Small Businesses. And the abundance of new regulations that have come in in the last several years. They ask a simple question. Can we have some mercy. If we miss something, come tell us we missed something, but dont come in with a fine book immediately. Come in with a warning. So i would ask only and we can work through this in the days ahead. I have a bill that actually deals with this issue specifically to mandate it especially for Small Businesses. They miss something. They dont have an attorney on staff. They dont have compliance people on staff, they run their business. Rather than just to be able to fine. Do you have a comment on that . I do, senator. At the same time i raised the point about enforcement in the paragraph before that, i talked about compliance assistance and the point i was making is that compliance assistance i thing is very important. We need enforcement to go hand in hand. But compliance assistance at the end of the day, i believe can bring about sometimes greater compliance. When i was United States attorney, i would talk to chambers and i said look, we can prosecute cases. But preventing wrongdoing in the first place is more successful. Isnt it better to have a traffic light that prevents accidents rather than give people tickets after the accident has occurred . So the current budget actually requests be a increase in the Compliance Assistance Program within osha for example. And in just this morning, the Department Also announced the return in the wage and hour division, opinion letters had been in use for 70 years, up until 2010. And theyre a mechanism by which Small Businesses or others can write and ask a question. How does this work. Because sometimes they dont know the answer. And so those opinion letters had been discontinued and we announced this morning that we are reinstating those opinion letters. Are you doing any kind of shuffling within your own staff to be able to look at and make sure that you have people in the right spots . Because when you deal with inspectors and all these other things, as Industries Rise and fall, sometimes you can end up with the wrong people that are covering an area in decline. For instance, no secret. Theres a lot of coal minus that have closed if we have a large number of inspectors with coal minus that are closing, that becomes an issue. Something epa and blm faced several years ago with a whole crew of people studying coal bit methane and were not using it any more. I encourage to you take it on in the days ahead. Thank you, senator. Thank you, senator langford. Senator merck . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I think one of the reasons that the Health Care Bill, about to be pending before the senate is so stunningly unpopular, is that the president , your boss, talked consistently during the campaign. And after the campaign. About a Health Care Reform bill, repeal of the Affordable Care act, that wouldnt cause anyone to lose insurance. Promises were made over and over again that more people would be insured after this process was finished than under the Affordable Care act. And cbo confirmed again yesterday that under the senate bill, 22 Million People across this country, the equivalent population of 16 u. S. States works lose their health care insurance. Speaking to your portfolio, mr. Secretary, the effect is on individuals with employersponsored health care and those who are getting their insurance through other means, theres a recent article in the atlantic, which says, headline is how the gops Health Care Bill would affect people insured through work and the subheadline is knewer people would sign up for employersponsored plans and fewer employers would offer coverage, millions of people would lose employersponsored health care, according to the cbo estimates. So given the promises that were made, by many of our colleagues and by the president himself. I guess i have a Pretty Simple question for you. Do you think that the purpose or the outcome of Health Care Reform, should be to insure or less americans . Senator, Health Care Reform and as were looking at this Health Care Bill, were asking how can you go forward as a nation. With a bill that respects individual choice. Ultimately, senator murray raised a question around health care as well. As were looking at the workplace, one issue that certainly i think we need to consider, is what does this do in terms of jobs. And does the multiplicity of expenses that are put on employers create a disincentive to hire. And so certainly we need to respect individual choice. We need to consider whether were going to be creating jobs by in fact reducing the costs of many of these programs that do place burdens on the economy as a whole. Let me restate the question. Insurance is really important to people. Prefer jobs that have insurance. Do you think that the purpose of Health Care Reform should be to insure more people, or less people . Senator, it began the purpose of Health Care Reform is to insure that individuals have access to insurance choice. And i guess you know, i push back because sometimes theres an effort to measure based on how much we spend, or how many people are covered. Rather than to measure based on our folks getting jobs. Or are we respecting individuals choices. So i do think its important to provide individuals with choice. But youre not suggesting that of the 22 Million People that will lose insurance, the majority of those people are choosing to lose insurance . What im suggest something we have a Health Care System that impose as number of mandates. And that is as a nation, getting increasingly expensive. And im Encouraging Congress to work to address the issues, i think its incredibly, one of the most important issues were facing. Health care is become morgue costly. Individuals are finding that they cannot afford what is in essence, a broken system. And i think its very important that it be addressed in a way that makes it effective in the longterm. I appreciate your comments. I would just say for the record, cbo does not come to the conclusion that 23 Million People, 22 Million People are going to lose coverage because they are exercising their right to decline coverage. They admit tle there will be a small portion of healthy individuals who may choose to go without health care. But they also come to the conclusion that the vast bulk of that 22 million are losing health care because they simply cannot afford it. Because the costs under the republican Health Care Bill will spiral 20 premium increases in the first year, 400 premium increases for older americans, such that it is completely and totally unaffordable. So i understand your comments about choice, thats not what cbs says is the main cause of why the numbers are absolutely catastrophic. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator murphy. Senator kennedy . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, think thats exactly what the cbo report says. Let me go back just quickly, to question that senator alexander asked you. Because im not sure about the answer. The president s executive order which i applaud. Do you plan to exempt the Construction Industry front . Senator, the president s executive order provides discretion to the secretary of labor to enact regulations that will guide decisionmaking in whether mr. Secretary, i got that part. Are you going to issue regulations. Are those regulations going to exempt the Construction Industry . Senator, under the administrative procedures act. I need to issue regulations, i would then need to apply those regulations to a particular fact pattern. I will say this the president is looking to expand apprenticeships across all industries. The president slooking to expand apprenticeships mr. Secretary, i understand all that and i appreciate it, im not trying to be rude. But were given five minutes. If you dont want to answer the question, just tell me. Senator, i am trying to answer the question. And my point is, the president s executive order to the extent something is working, does not want to disturb it, to the extent something is not working is looking to expand it and that will have to be determined. I get it, lets move on. When you became secretary, did you find waste in your budget . Senator, there are certainly ways of reducing and saving money within any agency, yes. Well, you cut 2. 6 billion out, right . In your budget . Am i right on that . Senator, my budget request does seek a rae ducks of 2. 6 billion. Do you support all those cuts . Senator, i acknowledge that we as a government need to reduce spending. And so i do think its important that we reduce the spending, yes. I do, too, i agree with you on that. What is the, were spending 434 million, on the Senior Community Service Employment program. Could you briefly tell me what that does . Senator there are a number of programs within the, within the training and Employment Services budget. And over time, different areas have developed programs of their own. One of the things that were looking to do is to streamline the different programs. Whats that program do, mr. Secretary . The Senior Community Services Employment program, to, you know, is to some extent, as many as onethird of participants. Let me put it this way, does it exist to transition seniors into unsubsidized employment . Yes it does, senator. Okay. That was easy. Why do we need to spend 434 million to do that . Well senator as i was saying there are a number of programs that have developed over time, focused on different groups within our country. Those programs are all important. But we can merge them, streamline them and make them part of larger programs. So one of the things that the budget looks to do is to streamline there are well over 40 different job Training Programs within the administration and merging those would be a costsaving measure. Look, i agree with you, im on your side, mr. Secretary. Youve been around here a long time. But ive driven over a good portion of washington, i cant find the money tree. Maybe its in a warehouse somewhere. I mean the topic, majority is health care which is extraordinarily important for our country. Nobody would deny that. But, but the question is not should we add more people or less people. The question is how many people can we afford to insure with the amount of taxpayer money that we have . And i appreciate your approach and i appreciate the president s approach. Because thats whats being lost in all this debate. Were borrowing 1 million a minute to run this place. 1. 4 billion a day. And i listen to people say add this, add that, like we were spending West Virginia ditch water. Instead of taxpayer money. I find your approach refreshing. I thank you for it, i wasnt trying to be rude. I was trying to get within my five minutes. And thank you, mr. Secretary. Thank you, senator. We assume theres more value to West Virginia ditch water than other ditch water, so thats all good. Senator durbin . Secretary acosta. Thank you for joining us. Weve got a problem in chicago, gun violence, its primarily among young people. Primarily minority populations and theres a 40 Unemployment Rate among young blacks in chicago. 40 . 20 or higher in latino populations. And we find something pretty amazing. If we can get many of these young people in a job, train for in a job. It does amazing things. Changes their lives. Im not making it up. A few weeks ago i went to the urban League Office and met with Curtis Martin. Curtis martin is exhibit a in what you would expect to turn out to be a gangbanger eventually in prison. But hes not. Its because he got in a program financed by the federal government and got him into a job. Hes working nights at u. P. S. Its not easy work, but hes damn proud of it and he told us that. Talking about going back to school now. Its a good thing. Now i look at your budget and youre cutting this program by 20 . You know the president noticed the violence in chicago and tweeted about it. A couple of occasions. I would like to read you what the president said. January 24th. If chicago doesnt fix the horrible carnage going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with, 42 killings, up 24 from 2016. Ill send in the feds. Then february 23rd, the president tweeted. Seven people shot and killed yesterday in chicago. Whats going on there . Totally out of control. Chicago needs help, the president tweeted. How does a 20 cut in program like the one that helped Curtis Martin help chicago . Let me say a few things, senator. I appreciate your point as u. S. Attorney. I took steps to address gun violence, using prosecutions, but one of the points i made is ultimately prosecutions arent the solution. We need to find jobs and we need to encourage young people to graduate high school. And to have skills. And thats something that i talked about greatly. Just in the past week i had the opportunity to meet with Workforce Development councils at the National Conference of mayors and i met with local officials at the National Association of latinoelected officials. And late they are week im going to be meeting with representatives of some other groups. Many of whom face similar issues with economically challenged regions. And my message to all of them is lets Work Together. Lets develop Apprenticeship Programs that will focus on these populations, because the best thing that we can do for them, is to provide them a pathway to a job by giving them job skills. So i understand that the budget to go to your question, i understand that the budget reductions are an issue. And you know, and so were looking at, at ways that we can make the programs more efficient and more effective and work with the private sector. I have one more question. Id like to invite to you chicago, i want to you come to the programs that youre proposing are going to be cut. I want you to meet the people in those programs. When we say send in the feds. Ky agree with the president , i want to send you in. Come on over to chicago. Take a look at what your programs are doing, what the cuts will mean. Second point i want to make, h1b visas, to allow skilled workers to come into the United States if they dont displace american jobs. Exhibit a, a Pharmaceutical Company in chicago announced to 150 of their i. T. Workers who had been with them for years that they were being terminated. 150 terminated. And here was the deal. They were terminated, as long as, or would get an extra benefit for their termination. Of one month of pay for every year of work if they agreed to two things. First, they dont say anything publicly about being fired. Secondly, they train their replacements. Their replacements were h1b visa holders from india. It turns out more than half of those visas go to two major outsourcing companies in india. What were the h 1 b visa workers going to do . They were going to replace the American Workers. So these pharmaceutical employees were required to train their replacements on the job as they walked out the door, the americans walked out the door and then the jobs were outsourced to india after these workers were trained. President talked about that in his campaign. He thought it was outrageous. I do, too. And i think it ought to be changed. Senator grassley and i have a reform bill but the president waited until after the award of h 1 b visas this year to announce an interagency review that i believe involves your department. How many meetings have you had in an interagency review of h 1 b visas . Senator, let me address both your points. First i gladly will join you in chicago. I think its very important and i do want to leave washington and travel and understand all the issues facing American Workers, so gladly. With respect to 1 b, weve been talking about this you know quite vigorously. Let me make two points. First, i think what happened as you describe it is offensive. And those are strong words and those senators that have heard me speak before know that for me to use those words, it means something. And it is offensive. We have scoured the law for options internally on how to address situations like those. And unfortunately, our hands, our ability is limited. But there is in addition to the larger bill, that im aware of, there are some, some very simple fixes, theres a 60,000 threshold in the h 1 b area. So its interesting, because Congress Talks about and i talk about and responded to questions with respect to over time and others and ive said life gets more expensive. And so when you have a dollar threshold. It should be updated over time. But congress is not updated that kz did 60,000 threshold over time. If congress were to update that simply for inflation it would bring it up to well over 80,000. And many, if not most of the situations like you have identified, would be eliminated because they would not be within, they would be below that 60,000 threshold. And so perhaps when that was enacted way back when that was a appropriate threshold. But i would encourage the senator to look at that issue. Because i cant imagine how one explains to an American Worker that they have to train their foreign replacement and its happened again and again and again. Thank you. Mr. Secretary what you meant there, think what i believe you said was, if the amount was updated, they would be below the updated 60,000, which would now be something close to 80. It would be above 80 and that is correct if i did not say that clearly that was my error. I think you may have said they would be below the 60,000 threshold. But you meant they would be below the updated . They would be below the updated, correct. Something to talk about and think about. Let me ask a couple of veterans questions. One that Congress Passed and you have in your department, a hire vets act. To create some recognition and standards for employer who is figure out how to hire vets. And then the second question on that topic is the concerns that gao had with the current veteran veterans efforts being made by the department before you got there. You want it talk about both of those things. Gladly. Mr. Chairman. Let me just say im reminded that congress has not updated that figure since 1998. And things certainly have gotten more expensive since the 1990s. With respect to the hire vets act. Its interesting because i was very excited when i saw the hire vet act. I think its really important that we recognize employers. And i said okay what are we doing for this veterans day. And i was told that the regulations couldnt be done by this veterans day. And i said it cant take that long to write regulations for rewards. So were expediting them. I should also say that the rules call for the requests for nominations to go out in january. So we may not be able to do it this year, even if we can move regulations quickly. Because of the very rules in the statute in which case, i may take it upon myself just as Discretionary Authority to give the equivalent this veterans day, because i dont want to wait another year and a half. To do this. Good answer this is sort of like the leeds standard recognition you get for energy efficiency. This would be youre establishing standards for employers and their relationship to how they hire vets what kind of credit they give for training in the service and other things. What about the criticism of the current efforts being mid by the department for veterans . I think one of the criticisms was that theres a lack of transparency with regard to the extent to which Veterans Employment Training Services are actually meeting performance goals and there were others in that gao report. So senator, one of the issues around Veterans Job Services is that theyre scattered around the executive branch. And one of the issues that were looking at is does it make sense to consolidate them in some way, shape or form. There are at least three different executive Branch Agencies that are responsible for veterans job, education and working with veterans. And that does lead to some level of confusion. I will say this, its a top priority, these individuals served their nation and they deserve not just to be treated with respect, but they deserve to have a job when they arrive here. Let me just add one additional issue. Because i know that this committee appropriated funds to look at certifications. Among the various states. One issue that ive been made aware of, that i think is very important in this area is that a veteran can be, a Service Member can be trained in the army for example to drive a commercial truck in fallujah. Yet they come stateside and they may not have the ability to drive a commercial truck in a particular state. Because states have different licensing requirements. And one of the concerns that i have and one question that i have is can we look at ways of working with states so that they recognize military licenses and certifications. That takes me perfectly to my next question. Which is in fy16 and 17, this bill included 7. 5 million to continue establishing some sort of consortium of states and certainly at the top of that priority list would be skills you learn while serving the country. Right up there with that are spouses that move from state to state, as their spouses transferred from one military base to the other. So that would be a second criteria. Maybe even more important to the active service. Than the first criteria. And the third would be generally what are we doing so that when somebody moves across the river from illinois to missouri, that they bring those skills with them that theres some reciprocity or understanding of that. The department has been asked two straight years to do that. Of course you werent there. But what are you going to do about it . The department has been asked. I know that a report is due, that has been funded by those appropriations this fall. I can tell the chairman that ive been talking with my own staff about this for the last two to three weeks since i first learned about it. Because particularly in the veterans side, i dont know how you justify telling someone it was okay for to you drive a truck full of explosives, but its not okay for to you drive a truck full of cocacola or pepsi. And thats something thats very difficult to swallow. And something that i certainly think is a priority. And will commit to working with the National Governors association and others that did receive this funding. I know theres a consortium of ten states thats being put together. Ive talked to my staff about tapping into that to make sure that it proceeds as expeditiously as possible. Senator graham, senator rubio and senator capet. Senator graham . You were asked by senator murphy about how many people will drop coverage, voluntarily, i guess for lack of a better world. The cbo report indicates to me, that 15 Million People will drop coverage they have today, because theyll be no fine if they dont provide if theyre not covered. Do you understand it that way, too . Senator, i have not, let me say this. The cbo report is something that before i comment on do you know the answer to my question . Senator my question is its my belief that the cbo report says that 50 million americans will drop the coverage they have today, because they wont have to pay a fine because well eliminate the fine. Senator, i wont contest your belief. Well i may be wrong. But you know, check it out. You dont have to answer right now. Are you familiar with the returning worker problem with h 2 B Visa Program . Yes, i am, senator. You have the authorities as i understand it, to fix that problem, legislatively, except for last year, congress has said that returning workers are not counted against the cap. Do you intend to fix that . Senator, let me address that in two ways. Because this is an important issue. First congress this year, empowered the secretary kelly, in consultation with me, to increase that cap. Secretary kelly has announced his intent to increase the amount by up to about 18,000 visas, which would be the highest level that weve seen in a number of years. Along with that, though, i think its important to say that congress looks at this year by year and rather than respectfully rather than fixing the issue. Sort of says the administration can do it if it would like to. And calls the administration and says please, increase it. And i think its very important that congress address this. There are specific fixes that can be, that can be until we get there but you do have the authority, i guess with secretary kelly, to not count returning orders against the cap . Is that correct . Or not . I believe the statute instead says we can increase the cap by up to the amount of returning workers and i believe secretary kelly has already indicated his intent to do so. Do you support that decision . Yes, secretary and i stand shoulder to shoulder. Give us suggestions of how we can fix this problem ourselves. I will gladly sit down, have our staff sit down with yours. Because i do think its a disservice to the businesses and to the individual workers to go through this every single year. Im very openminded about helping you fix it. One last thing very quickly. Artificial intelligence. Did you say it would be 50 years before we would feel the effect of Artificial Intelligence in terms of disrupting the labor force . Or was that somebody else . I have no idea who said that. It certainly wasnt me. Because it might have been the other guy. I dont know who it was. Do you believe it will be 50 years before Artificial Intelligence significantly disrupts the workforce . Senator, you know ive heard this from time to time. From various sources. And ill say this you know, weve been saying that technology is going to disrupt and displace the labor force since i think technology was first invented. Ultimately, the plow meant that fewer people had to plow a field. But ultimately, it changes the nature of the labor force and thats why its so important to have is there a plan within the department of labor to look specifically at the disruptive nature of Artificial Intelligence in the coming decade . Senator, weve started speaking about the changing nature of the workforce, the increasing use of art alternative methods of employment. The gig economy and thats something that were talking about. Does that include looking at Artificial Intelligence . Yes, it does, senator. Thank you very much. Senator manchin . Thank you very much. Thank you, secretary for being here, i appreciate it very much. Secretary decosta, im sure you know about the miners pension. My colleague senator caputo and i introduced the bill, the miners pension protection act. I guess what i would ask you is the department of labor activity working on solutions for this problem. Because thats going to be a tremendous problem by 2022. Senator, it is going to be a tremendous problem, and we are actively working on developing solutions for this, and for the broader issues. That this touches upon. You have recommendations for the bankruptcy laws that need to be changed so that human beings will be protected more so than Financial Institutions . Senator, i dont have recommendations at this time. We are looking at options and we are discussing them. The mine Safety Health Administration Funding request, underlying premise of msha is to prevent mining accidents. Coal mining is inherently dangerous. To date in 2017, nine miners have perished in coal minus, including five in West Virginia. I was governor at the time, we had some horrific losses. Sego, air coma and Upper Big Branch with 29 miners. President trump requested 375 million for mine Safety Health administration for 2018, an increase from 374. I guess i would ask your plan for msha. Do you all think you have the necessary resources and authority to prevent future mining fatalities . As you indicated, the budget is relatively unchanged from msha and we do believe we have the necessary resources. How do you intend to encourage the environment in which mine safety inspectors and mine employees are encouraged to speak up about violations . Do you all have a plan along those lines . I think more specifically, theres an awful lot of mentality if you will around a mine site that some people wont say anything because theyre afraid of losing their job. And theres other mine operators, who encourage someone if you see something wrong and you can fix it, please do so. If it entails even shutting down the mine for a period of time. Have you weighed in and evaluated this . Senator, so there is sometimes i think not just in mining, but in several industries, an unfortunate reticence to vort issues and i think thats something that were always looking to address and fight against. I should also say that something that you see particularly in the mining area. Is frequent inspections to try to identify safety issues. So even when theyre not reported, in the ideal case and in fact in most cases, the inspections do turn up the safety issues. Occupational safety and health dmirngs osha as we know it, plays a Critical Role in insuring that our workers in safe in the workplaces, unfortunately, the president s budget request include as small cut to osha and shifrts their focus from enforcement and inspections, it would cut 26 employees and conduct almost 1,000 fewer inspections. Osha resources are already strained and too many workers are being put in danger. In 2015, 4836 workers were killed across the country on the job. On jobs across our country. I ask the secretary, given the dangers that so many workers face in the workplaces, why do you believe the department of labor is shifting osha resources away from inspections . And dont you think this might endanger more workers . Senator, if i could, the osha, if i could, the osha budget does shift approximately, made up of 2 million in two compliance assistance. That does reflect a belief that some of the programs that are longstanding, the dpp programs and others that work with particular companies, to foster, to foster compliance assistance, may produce, not may, but the evidence shows actually do produce Better Safety outcomes. Its a net of about a 2 million shift. How would you if youre focusing, it looks like your shift is focusing away from enforcement inspections. How would it be safer . Senator, will et me just say its not, when youre talking about a funding request of 543 million. A 2 million shift, with due respect is pretty much under 1 and that is so that we can fund the dpp program that has in fact been shown to be very successful, working with companies and saying these are the steps you need to take. So that you can provide a safe workplace, so as i said at the opening, the fact that were engaged in compliance assistance that were telling people what they need to do, to have a safe workplace, doesnt mean that we have any less enforcement. It just means that were respected in saying this is what you need to do and if they dont do it, were going to enforce. Your focus is still on safety . Absolutely. Thank you. If you have time there will be a second round of questions. Senator rubio . Thank you for being here. I dont know if we can get through this in five minutes. One of the topics is at the cutting edge of whats going to confront labor for years to come. A lot of the debates have been treating some of the challenges to work in america as were undergoing some sort of cyclical challenge this is a structural disruption of the very nature of the economy, weve had these before. The industrial revolution, except its happening every three years, instead of over a 50year period. So the disruptions are extraordinary, fast, difficult to predict and anticipate. Senator graham asked about Artificial Intelligence. The same is true for just automation in general we have these debates about bringing factories back from mexico that would be great but theyre going to be american robots instead of mexican robots. But many of them, it will be automation nonetheless. Thats the reality. We cant turn the clock back. We could, but it would be devastating to our economy to do so in terms of the nature of technologys role. I would encourage, these reports are prepared. I think they will provide if we could somehow anticipate what the basic skills for the labor force in 10 or 50 years are going to be, i think it would be a valuable tool to states to develop curriculum and pro program to begin to address it the key worker 25 years from now is probably in grade school today if theyre not acquirie i those skills, were going to have a challenge in terms of global competitiveness. I hope were not viewing next years needs. Understanding how difficult it is to anticipate some of these changes. Ive told my child who is nine, almost ten, the job he will end up having probably hasnt been invented yet. But nevertheless, thats that. On the certification, we had a chance to talk about it it extends into things like nursing and health care. Some idea, at a minimum incentivize states and create avenues so there will be some shortterm recognition. Some period of time in which that license would be recognized, giving them the time to take the state license fogger whatever that capacity might be. I look brf briefly at what what the gi bill cover, i believe it covers the cost of the certification tests. What it doesnt cover, my cursory research showed is, its not within your department, but the cost of preparing for those tests if youre going to take a nursing exam or to get a state license somewhere youve got to study this stuff and oftentimes the cost of doing so is education and capacitation, we can work on something in that regard. The two things i want to ask you about, i dont know if youve been asked about this yet is the paid leave component of the budget. I believe that paid leave is something thats a 21st century necessity. How we get there is complex. Whats interesting is i learn more and more about it is big companies, governments, large employers and quite frankly, people that make a lot of money are offered paid leave and many of the major corporations in america are already offered it you see people making a substantial amount of money, receiving paid leave, i dont want them to lose it. Has any thought been given as you tailor the administrations proposal as to how we can concentrate our efforts here on the people at the lower end of the income spectrum. The people making the 25,000 to 80,000 whatever the right number cutoff is. I dont want people who are making 300,000 a year to lose their paid leave. But the people who would really benefit from it and are most hurt by the absence of it are at the lower end of the scale. This is an idea thats going to take some time to develop. In terms of working it out, has some thought been given to kind of prioritizing at least what whatever we do, to be at that end of the scale. The fear quite frankly is that we create some sort of incentive for companies that are already offering it. To offer less of it. Because this new alternative stepped up. I know its an idea thats still being worked on. Senator, thank you for the comments and the question. Let me take them, each in order fairly quickly. Theres an interesting book thats been written that calls this the age of acceleration. With each Cycle Technology changes faster and faster. So ten years ago the iphone that i suspect most in this room, have in their pocket or the smartphone they have in their pocket didnt exist, facebook was limited to college campuses. Sometimes we dont realize its only been ten years what will the world look like ten years from now, its almost hard to imagine because it hasnt been invented. And so one of the reasons that weve talked about demanddriven education is because we believe that its very important that education and workforce education in particular, be nimble enough to respond to changing Workforce Needs and to predict changing Workforce Needs, because technology will change the skills that are required. Moving quickly to your question regarding paid leave. You know the administration has put forward a proposal, i know that that proposal has been discussed vigorously. Theres some that say that its not enough. Theres some that say its too much. There are some that say its not calibrated. But ultimately it is a proposal. And it is the start of a conversation that is a very important conversation. And i know that the senate has engaged in it vigorously and i know youve take an leadership role in it, senator. And i am glad that that conversation is being had, because at the end of the day, it is conversations like this one that will result in good outcomes. Thank you, senator rubio. Senator capito . Thank you chairman blount and Ranking Member and secretary acosta. Its nice to see you. Thank you for your service. My companion senator from the great state of West Virginia asked a couple of similar questions as to what i was going to ask particularly on the mine safety and health administration. Obviously its important for us, who have a lot of coal miners in a dangerous situation that they remain safe. And so i appreciate your efforts there. To continue, continuous funding to fund that office. And the challenges, i am happy to report that in swraest have a, we have 1,034 more coal miners working than we did at the end of 2016. So the administrations efforts in that regard have been, are very much appreciated. In the context of losing so many jobs, tens of thousands of jobs. Program was created within the Labor Department to help dislocated workers from the coal industry to readjust. And its been funded at 19 and 20 million in retraining and i believe this is still very much needed. Do you have any insight now that its been two years in the making as to whats been effective with training dislocated miners and where youre seeing some success . Senator, i dont have that data presently. But im more than happy to have the department gather that and to convey that to your staff. And your colleague, senator mannen chins staff manchins s wanted to begin by inviting you to West Virginia. Wed love to have you there. And the initiative on apprenticeships is very much welcome in a state that has traditionally had many unions that have successfully employed many people for many years in our state. Through their apprenticeships, beginning with their Apprenticeship Programs, the mode of getting the worker trained and to a job has been successful in the past. So i want to join with the administration in efforts to expand that. Thank you. And i would be more than happen to visit once again, West Virginia. So thank you. Great. Lastly the budget, your budget also has in it for the dislocated worker, 66 moip to appalachianen communities to provide dislocated workers for employment and training. As your justification, youve said the setaside will target Services Previously provided by the appalachian regional commission. I take exception that the appalachian regional commission, even though in the president s budget it was zeroed out. I think were going to fight hard and we have a Bipartisan Group here to make sure we retain the Economic Development aspects of the arc. But i would just like to work with you to not only train, but all of the economic efforts of getting appalachia back on its feet again. We have a huge opioid around our region thats coupled with joblessness. And a lot of hopelessness in some cases. Your department is absolutely critical to the folks that i live in and around to getting us back on our feet. I understand, senator, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, senator capito. Senator murray . Mr. Secretary, i know youve heard a lot about Apprenticeship Programs, i think most people on this committee strongly support them. But im concerned that the president s executive order serve as a distraction from whats happening in the budget where theres a huge slash in investments for workforce training, Public Health and education. These are issues that have been bipartisanly supported. The investments on this committee. Chairman blount and i have been able to investments and register apprenticeship grants since 2016. These are grants that have put tens of thousands of workers on a proven path to the middle class and helped address employers needs for skilled workers. The president s proposal intends to circumvent a Proven Program with wages and training and equal opportunity employment standards, and those standards not only protect workers, by the way. They ensure employers actually get highly skilled workers. By comparison, the president s proposal could open the door to any Company Including fake colleges Like Trump University to develop lowquality programs that benefit corporations and special interests at the expense of workers so tell us yet president chose to undermine the registered a printisship program that has bipartisan support here rather than fund what we know works . Senator, thank you for the question and its something that ive been reading about in the media, and i do want to take this opportunity to address that. As you mention, a printisships is are a proven. The resulting wage is a strong wage. The employment record, the probability of employment following an apprenticeship is outstanding and it is a proven system. And so the president s executive order sets up a mechanism to allow these Apprenticeship Programs to grow across industries, not just limited to the Traditional Industries like Building Trades where theyve been used, but across industry. Weve had even, you know, individuals from mercurio capital that were part of the order where they participated in apprenticeship trading and also increase in scale. The approach taken is not an approach that sacrifices quality and my personal perspective is that this will not and should not sacrifice quality because the industry has an interest in quality because they have an interest in assuring a Skilled Workforce. Correct. If one were to look at the way the department of education, for example, approaches many of these issues, the department of education empowers the American Medical Association, for example, to accredit medical schools, yet, we dont hear discussion of how theres a sacrificing and quality among medical schools because we looked at the American Medical Association and we say, look, theyre empowered. Ive only got a minute and a half, and i hear what youre saying. I just want you to know that thats how i look at this, and we have to make sure that those Apprenticeship Programs i should talk about are ones that actually provide highly skilled, qualified workforce and the details matter on this. I do want to follow up on secretary rubio, senator rubios question to you, mr. Secretary, about paid leave because i heard what he was saying and i am i have looked at this and the president provides new parents with six weeks of paid leave, but the way it paid for it suggests that states pay for it through their state Unemployment Insurance programs, which by the way, disproportionately exclude women and vulnerable workers and theyre the exact people that senator rubio said need it and to make matters worse, state Unemployment Benefits are extremely low. So modest, in fact, that lowwage workers will not be able to take leave even if it were technically available and similarly, the president s proposal focuses on new parents. People need leave if their parent or child is seriously ill. I just want you to know im following this very closely, and i think paid leave is extremely important and we cant throw out a proposal as if because states cant make up that and we need to be serious about it and bee need to make sure as senator rubio pointed out that those who have paid leave tend to be the more highly paid workers. Theyre not the ones im so worried about. Im worried about those clerks at the grocery store, nurses and other folks and ill be following that very closely, as well. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator murray. Far be it from me to take any of my time defending cbo. I can think of many more cases where they had implementation of Medicare Part d costing almost twice as much as it actually cost over the first year and the years to follow that, or when the Affordable Care act was scored by cbo there would be 25 Million People getting insurance into the individual market instead of the nine that are getting insurance in the individual market. So cbo scoring is notoriously bad. Im sure its not accurate here, but if you want to look at that 22 million figure, they said was the figure they were coming up with. They said 15 Million People would be uninsured because the penalty was removed and they would choose not to have insurance if there wasnt a penalty, so that is a big number and answers the question that you were asked earlier. I did check on the last scoring of the house bill, i think 3 Million People that currently have medicaid at no cost would choose not to have medicaid if you eliminate the penalty for not having insurance, so thats the cbo view of that future and not necessarily the one that would turn out to be accurate. On h2b issues you pointed out the Committee Gave quite a bit of flexibility and encouragement to deal with that as we have for some time whatever you and general kelly would like to talk about in terms of how we get a longterm solution instead of a short term i think is a perfectly fine idea, but not for this year. This is going to take longer to put together the facts. I think even some discussion of looking at regional impact number when senator mculski used to set on this deus, she was always very interested in fishermen and crabbing and things that have no impact in missouri, but have a big impact in maryland, and i understand all of that and appreciate it, but what happens this year is what needs to be dealt with right now. And if you move forward how quickly do you think you and Homeland Security will be in a place that will decide whats going to happen this year . Mr. Chairman, thank you for the comment and let me say senator kelly and i have spoken and he has indicated publicly his intent to increase the cap pursuant to the authority. He and i stand shoulder to shoulder on the decision. We agree on that outcome. And weve also spoken about how quickly we can move forward and he is working as expeditiously as possible with the understanding that the individuals are waiting for those visas, and so i would defer to dhs, but i would say that senator kelly is personally possible. Again, with the understanding and im happy to work with the chairmans staff that is important to not do this year after year, but to have a permanent fix so that were not putting all these businesses and all these individuals in this position of uncertainty again. Yeah. I think thats a perfectly reasonable thing to do as long as we realize thats what we ought to be talking about after your study is done, and it would be impractical to try to do it this year, but very prakt kl to do it in the future and so we dont have to do it every year. Lets talk about job corps. There are 125 job corps certains in the United States. Three of them are in missouri, and i think in the budget and bill that the congress voted on in april we increased job corps by about 15 million this proposal cuts it by 256 million with expressed intension that the department that some of the job corps sites would be closed and many as many as 20. So i have three questions there. What methodology would you use to decide what centers to close and how would you relocate any students in those senators and are you committed to keeping at least one senator in every state . Senator, thank you for those questions. Let me take them in order. First, methodology. I think its very important to have if depending on where the budget ends up we need to have a methodology because these are very sensitive centers. The methodology should be based on outcomes and it shouldnt be based on the number of participants, but rather on whether theyre getting jobs and that outcome measure should be sensitive to differences in regions. And so a region that has significant challenges in jobs and job growth may have a Job Corps Center that may be phenomenally successful even though the employment rate is lower than the employment rate of another Job Corps Center that is in a region that is experiencing economic growth. And so the outcome needs to be what ill call a regionally adjusted employment outcome measure. Certainly, it would be the case that we would notify members of the senate and members of congress before closing in a Job Corps Center because they are important to districts and to states and so i cant commit to ensuring that theres one in every state, but i can certainly commit to notifying members of congress and members of the senate so that members of both the house and the senate and members of congress so there is an opportunity for a wholesome discussion, but at the end of the day i do think it feeds to be based on metrics. Let me finally say. What about students in the centers that you would close. Senator, i think that would have to be looked at very closely. My hope is that they we could use the equivalent of a method which is whats used in colleges. Let me make two final points, as the senator acknowledged at the beginning, this is a discussion that congress has, and this is something i would be committed to working with the Committee Staff on because it is important, and i do recognize from my visits with so many members of the committee, the importance of these centers and so i dont think this should be a unilateral, but i do think it needs to be part of a more fulsome discussion. Thank you, mr. Secretary and thank you for your team that has been here today. The record will stay open for one week for additional questions and the subcommittee stands at recess. Tonight on our companion network, cspan. Sarah huckabee