--------- The subcommittee on early childhood, elementary, and secondary education will come to order. I note that a quorum is present. Without objection, the chair is authorized to call recess at any time. The notion that every student should go to college was perhaps well intended,
but it was never compatible with the needs of young people or of our country. While every student should have the opportunity to go to college, this is not the only path to success. Thankfully, in recent years, we've seen a renewed commitment to supporting alternate alternate pathways, in
particular career and technical education. While CTE is not new, its value has often been overlooked or dismissed in recent decades as the fallback option for students who don't fit into the traditional academic mold. Today, there is no denying its critical role in
preparing the workforce for a skills forward economy. CTE is for students who want to build, create, and lead. It is for students who learn best by doing. Over 8 million secondary school students nationwide are already participating in CTE programs. They're learning to
design, weld, code, and provide life-saving care. These students gain hands-on experience that leads to good and stable jobs. And the results speak for themselves. Students who concentrate in CTE, completing more than two credits, graduate at rates above 90%,
significantly higher than the national average. CTE participation also boosts academic achievement, and even promotes college readiness itself. More than 40 states allow students to take CTE courses through dual enrollment enrollment programs at technical or
community colleges, enabling them to earn college credits in high school. This can lead to associates degrees, bachelor degrees, and industry recognized credentials. And students are eager for these opportunities. 85% of recent high school graduates took at
least one CTE course. CTE classrooms are filled with future engineers, health care professionals, business owners, and innovators. It's not a second option. It's a pathway to success in high school, higher education, and the workforce. How we prepare our students
today will determine not just their future success, but our nation's economic strength. Job creators across the country are struggling to find workers who have the right skills. This present and growing gap threatens our nation's economic competitiveness.
Employers are looking for candidates who demonstrate skills, not just degrees, to meet the demands of an economy with 7.2 million open jobs. In our dynamically changing economy, we must reimagine student programs to meet the demands of today's and tomorrow's labor market. And
that's what CTE is all about. By design, it equips students with skills that match real job opportunities, providing pathways to immediate employment. That means fewer unfilled jobs, more career ready graduates and a stronger economy. I look forward to hearing from our
witnesses who have built exceptional career and technical education programs, and to discussing how we can strengthen and expand their work at schools across America. With that, I'll turn to the ranking member for an opening statement. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses. We've been I
know we've both been looking forward to this hearing. I I appreciate this hearing today where we can talk about the importance of career and technical education, which historically has had bipartisan support. But I do want to address the recent deeply troubling actions that threaten the effectiveness
of CTE and long-standing bipartisan legacy. Earlier this year, President Trump kicked off his second term by signing an executive order to dismantle and close the Department of Education. As part of that effort, the executive branch used a questionable inter agency
agreement, an IAA, to transfer much of the administration of CTE and adult education programs from the Department of Education to the Department of Labor. Along with this, $2 billion in funding for programs under the Office of Career and Technical Education
was transferred out of the Education Department to the Department of Labor. Just yesterday, the department announced six new inter agency agreements to move more critical education programs to the departments of labor, interior, health and human services. This is not routine. It's the consequences of this agreement
will be farreaching. It's also part of a broader effort to shut down the Department of Education without the consent of Congress. We should all be concerned about the destructive message of shutting down the Department of Education. What does that say about our country? scattering programs and resources across offices
that aren't equipped to administer them will hurt students in schools. And I want to make clear today that we must fi fight to reclaim our article one responsibility and conduct and conduct oversight over the administration to uh reverse this irresponsible decision.
Moving the administration of CTE to the Department of Labor is a mistake for many reasons. First, CTE is more than job training or short short-term job placement. It helps students, many of them as early as middle school, explore careers, build skills, and prepare for
higher education or long-term careers and high demand fields. That kind of lifelong learning pipeline can't be built or maintained without staff who have spent their careers crafting educational pathways, not just administering workforce training grants, which is also important, but a different
task. Offloading these programs to an agency that lacks that background is a disservice to our children, to the future, and it also violates the Perkins Act, which I worked with several of my colleagues here today to reauthorize in 2018 when it was signed into law by
President Trump. Second, these programs are objectively worse off now than they that now that they've been moved to the Department of Labor. Under the Department of Education, the programs were aligned with academic standards focused on long-term success and embedded into the education ecosystem at
the state and local level. The Department of Labor's job training programs, by contrast, are often short-term, disconnected from education systems and focused on immediate employment rather than sustained learning. This shift risks turning CTE into the type of narrow vocational
training we worked for decades to move away from. We support it, but not it's not the same as CTE where students often from lowincome families or communities of color were tracked into limited job paths with little room for upward mobility. Ironically, the transfer of
these programs from education to the Department of Labor has created more bureaucratic inefficiencies, not reduce them. States, school districts, and institutes of higher education are now forced to navigate two different agencies to access one program. We've heard stories from states are spending
all their time learning a new grant management system instead of doing what they should be doing, which is innovating. Delays in grant processing and decision-making are already being reported. And we've only begun to see the fallout. It's pretty chaotic. And third, the innovation we've seen in CTE
over the past decade is now at risk. And that pro progress was made possible because states had the flexibility to tailor programs to meet the needs of their students and local economies. But this new hyperpartisan shift, driven not by educational best practices, but by
ideology, it threatens to stifle innovation. A bipartisan success story is now being drawn into a federal bureaucratic tugofwar, placing unnecessary hurdles in front of states that were leading the way in expanding access and improving outcomes, including my home state of Oregon. I want to
emphasize career and technical education works. It works because it's educationdriven. It works because it was crafted in a bipartisan manner and in partnership with educators, employers, and communities. And it works because it's the kind of engaging, handson,
problem-solving learning that engages students. And it works because we had career professionals in the Department of Education who understood the difference between preparing students for the future and displacing them in a job. I wish we could spend the whole hearing discussing the exciting
innovations in CTE that states like my home state of Oregon are leading. My states made CTE a priority. We've seen absenteeism decrease. We've seen graduation rates increase. I've taught amazing programs including a culinary arts program at Lincoln High School in
Portland, a fish hatchery management program at Warrington High School on the coast, health sciences in Hillsbor, and a program in Sherwood, Oregon, where students actually design, build, and then sell a home. These have provided incredible opportunities for students to learn collaboration, critical thinking,
communication, responsibility. But unfortunately, this administration is dragging us into another partisan fight. Look, just look at the Heritage Foundation's project 2025, which laid the groundwork for this illegal move of moving the depart the program and
shutting down the Department of Education. So, we can't afford to let CTE be undermined. Congress must reject this transfer, restore the programs at the Department of Education where they belong, and guarantee that any future changes go through the proper legislative channels, not through
backdoor bureaucratic maneuvers. Our goal should be to improve and innovate CTE. This isn't just a matter of process. It's protecting learning for millions of learners. And I do, Mr. Chairman, as I yield back, want to introduce a few pieces for the record about some of the work uh that Oregon
has done. There's a report from Stanford Children on how Oregon's measure 98 result which prioritized career technical education resulted in significant growth in student achievement and graduation rates. Second, a piece from the Oregon Capital Chronicle celebrating the 97.7%
high school graduation rate of students enrolled in two or more CTE classes last year in 2024. and an article from the Portland Business Journal on how Portland Community College is investing in CTE and partnering with industry to develop highquality course offerings.
So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to the witness's testimony. And with that, I yield back. >> Pursuant to committee rule 8C, all members who wish to insert written statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5:00 p.m. 14 days after this hearing.
And without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous material noted during the hearing to be submitted for the official hearing record. I note that some of our colleagues were not permanent members of the subcommittee may be joining us at today's hearing. I'll now introduce our
witnesses. Our first witness is Dr. Deb Volzer, the vice president for workforce development atme in Warthingington, Ohio. Our second witness is Mrs. Christy Rice, a cyber security teacher at Spennsylvania High School in Spennsylvania, Virginia. Our third
witness is Mr. Braden Goats, a senior policy adviser at the center on education and lab and labor at New America here in Washington DC. And our fourth witness is Mrs. Nicole Gasper, the CEO of the West Michigan Aviation Academy in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
We thank the witnesses for being here today and we look forward to your test testimony. Pursuant to committee rules, I would ask that you each limit your oral presentation to a threeminut summary of your written statement. As committee members have many questions for you, the clock will countdown from three minutes. However, pursuant to committee rule 8D and committee
practice, we will not cut off your testimony until you reach the five-minute mark. I would also like to remind the witnesses to be aware of the responsibility to provide accurate information to the subcommittee. I will first recognize Dr. Volzer for your testimony.
Thank you, Chairman Kylie and Ranking Member Bonamichi and distinguished members of the committee. Truly, thank you for the opportunity to speak on this critical issue today. I'm representing the national nonprofit with nearly a hundred years of experience in building manufacturing talent and accelerating
advanced technology adoption. We have trained millions of incumbent workers. Inspired hundreds of thousands of students and work daily with employers, educators, workforce agencies, and community partners across our country from small businesses to
Fortune 500s. What truly sets apart is our dual perspective. We are not only at the table shaping national strategy, we are inside the four walls of industry every single day. This connection gives us real time insight into what manufacturers need now and how to
deliver scalable high impact training solutions that meet our manufacturers's needs. Our manufacturers are giving us a stark warning. Their workforce is aging. Their skills gap is widening and too few young people are entering the manufacturing workforce.
This is the reality facing our country and the stakes could not be higher. We are not facing a future workforce problem. We are facing a future workforce crisis and while investing in K12 is essential, it's simply not enough. As such, we urge Congress and
state leaders to expand access to modern industry connected CTE programs in every community to equip the next generation for high wage high-tech manufacturing careers. SME's Education Foundation Prime program is active in over 118 high
schools across 25 states. And through a four-year pathway, students gain hands-on experience working with industrial equipment and software leading to the acquisition of industry relevant skills. We support this pipeline with teacher training, sustainability funding, and award over a
million dollars annually in scholarships. The strength of education and training relies on our direct industry engagement. We know firsthand that when this vital connection is not there, it weakens or breaks down. Students risk
learning outdated skills on outdated equipment with outdated processes that no longer meet the evolving demands of modern manufacturing. Prime program is solving this issue at scale. And while Prime and other programs can train the next generation of talent, we cannot overlook one of the
most underrecognized challenges in workforce development, the shortage of qualified instructors. Without instructors, programs stall, learners wait, skill development slows, and our nation's manufacturing capabilities weaken.
Is actively addressing this challenge through our maritime manufacturing workforce pipeline. This program is designed to meet critical ship building needs across the Gulf Coast and Indopaccom regions. And by integrating K12 and post-secondary pathways in alignment to industry competencies in a
cohesive K20 model, we are building short, mid, and long-term solutions to support both current and future workforce demands. And finally, I would be remiss if I did not clearly state that technology is transforming manufacturing at an unprecedented pace
from automation and data analytics to advanced robotics and artificial intelligence. To keep up, our workforce and training programs need continuous alignment requiring deep industry engagement. In closing, as mentioned, the stakes
have never been higher and we are facing a defining moment for US manufacturing. A strong, skilled, and future ready workforce is not just an economic an economic asset. It is a strategic necessity. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this critical issue. And
please know that theme will continue to innovate, collaborate, and lead the adoption of technology while building talent to leverage that technology to preserve our global manufacturing might. I look forward to your questions. >> Thank you very much. Mrs. Rice, you're
now recognized for your testimony. Good afternoon, Chairman Kylie and Ranking Member Bonabichi and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Christy Rice and I teach cyber security at Spennsylvania High School, a rural high school in Spennsylvania, Virginia.
Despite our rural setting, we have built one of the most dynamic and successful cyber security programs in the Commonwealth, if not the nation. I teach a three-level pathway and coach the award-winning cyber knights. In my classroom, I like to think outside the box. Instead of only lecturing about
threats and defenses, my stu students learn through hands-on gamified activities like capture the flag competitions. They solve real world challenges in cryptography, forensics, and network defense. As a coach for the US cyber team, I bring back elite level strategies from international
competition and adapt them for high school students, showing them that cyber security is not just a class, but a pathway to national service and high demand careers. I also pushed my students to get outside the box, literally. My students have toured the
Pentagon, visited FBI headquarters, presented at the White House Quad Cyber Challenge, and attended cyber security conferences and networking events. For many of our rural students, these are the first experiences that help them see themselves as future professionals protecting critical systems and
infrastructure. Some of these students are here today. To expand access, I founded the Virginia High School Cyber Cup, a hands-on cyber security competition hosted by the Virginia and US Cyber Range Cloud CTF platform. I also co-founded the Cyber Circuit. It's
a virtual cyber security club that includes students whose schools don't yet offer cyber security or who are homeschooled. These efforts ensure that any student anywhere in Virginia can step into the cyber security world. Innovation in CTE must also support our educators. Through
the Gen Cyber Teacher Program with Virginia Tech and the University of North Georgia, I help prepare new teachers teach cyber security in their first year. And in my role as a career kickstart facilitator and pilot teacher for the college board's AP cyber
security course, I support educators nationwide on building a highquality pathway. The impact is clear. Six of my former students have earned the DoD Smart Scholarship. Many now work with federal agencies and in industry. A high percentage of my students graduate with
the CompTIA Security Plus and we have seen a strong increase in female participation. What's at stake is our national security and our economic future. If we don't connect classroom to career in fields like cyber security, we risk falling behind in both talent and readiness.
When we invest in educators, empower our students and create pathways that connect classroom to real world challenges. We don't just prepare students for jobs. We prepare them to protect and lead the in the digital frontier. Thank you for your time and today.
>> Thank you very much. Uh Mr. Goats, you're recognized for your testimony. >> Good afternoon, uh, Chairman Kylie, Ranking Member Vanamichi, and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify. Um, as you mentioned, I'm a senior policy adviser in the Center on Education and Labor at
New America. Um, my written testimony highlights some CTE innovations and talks about some recommendations for Perkins reauthorization. But I think the best use of my time is to first thank you for your past support of CTE and then to appeal to you to help us return
Perkins to the Department of Education. Before New America, I worked for 26 years for the Department of Education. Most of that time in the office of career technical and adult education or octay. Um when I joined ED, CTE then known as vocational education was not
well regarded. It was on the margins of public education. An undemanding alternative. It taught narrow set of skills for specific jobs that were many of which were low wage. Since that time, CTE leaders and policy makers like
yourselves have transformed vocational education. Um it is now CTE now prepares students for with durable skills for college and career. The transfer of Perkins to the Department of Labor threatens that progress. Operationally, it is a muddle
because Perkins Perkins is very clear that the Secretary of Education is the only one who can make policy decisions. What Ed has done is done is transferred the implementation of her decisions to do. So, they sent over a team of Octay employees who report to a DO career
official who report to a policymaking official who on up to the chain of command, the Secretary of Labor. I don't understand how the work gets done when Secretary McMahon makes a decision. Does she call the Secretary of Labor and ask her to communicate that down the chain?
And what happens if the Octay employees at the bottom of the chain have questions or they have other other issues they need policy decisions on? They communicate that back up the chain and the two secretaries talk. Um, it's also confusing and inefficient.
Um, do also does not have expertise in ed regulations like charter school funding. North Dakota just passed a new charter school law. They're going to be coming to the Department of Labor asking for help in understanding ED's regulations for charter schools. Good
luck to them. Also troubling are the implications for ensuring that all students have equal access and opportunities to succeed in CTE. Since 1979, state Perkins agencies have been responsible for proactive civil rights monitoring that's also known as methods
of administration. Department has not clarified what happened to those responsibility and who's helping them with them. In some states, has been struggling to get access to their money. Um yesterday I was surprised to hear uh the department put out a fact sheet that said that 35
grantees had had accessed their Perkins money since the transfer. Well, there are more than 35 Perkins grantees and it's been two months been very difficult for states. There are third there are 57 grantees
including DC, Puerto Rico, outlying areas, Virgin Islands but only 35 have access. And for all of this, from what I understand, ED is paying DO $200,000 per quarter. That's a lot of money to pay for something you can do yourself.
Of course, you could address all of these problems and simply amend Perkins and move it to DO, but that would be a mistake. CTE is fundamentally an education program. It is not job training. Do's training programs serve an important function by helping adults
who are out of work find work quickly. Most common programs are in ground transportation like truck driving and nursing occupations that require less than an associates degree. Many of them pay less than the median wage. That is not the orientation or the result we
want for high school CTE programs. We need to be building long-term pathways to prosperous futures for every student, not steering them into the next available job regardless of its quality. Moving Perkins also puts do puts the federal government out of step with the
states. CTE is universally regarded as a CTE program by states. 47 states in the District of Columbia run Perkins out of a K12 agency or higher ed agency. Locating Perkins at DO threatens to remarize CTE. We have made so much
progress. Please do not let Secretary McMahon take us back. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Uh, and Mrs. Gasper, you'll recognize for your testimony. >> Chairman Kylie and Ranking Member Bonamichi and members of the committee, thank you so much for the opportunity to
share with you what we get to do with and for our families at the West Michigan Aviation Academy. We are a public charter high school located at the Gerald R. Ford International Airport in Grand Rapids, Michigan, where we get the privilege of serving just over 600
students in grades 9 through 12. We are heavily focused on aviation as our name indicates but also heavy STEM and the uh piece that really sets us apart is our professional culture
at the academy. Career and teched is key to what we get to do for our young people. It's critical to our mission. We get to create meaningful talent pipelines. And over the 15 years, we've
demonstrated that by having just under 200 high school seniors earn their private pilots licenses by the time they've graduated. We've also had 27 of our students earn their part 107A commercial drones licenses. Both of them
are portable credentials that our young people get to walk out of our high school with. Our robotics team has found themselves multiple times on the world stage down in Texas. And we've also had a state recognized science olympiad
team. Our students currently in our build a plane course um we've not only built a carbon cub EX2 that was uh deemed airworthy that we sold to replenish the project but now our students are
refurbishing a 1975 Balanca Scout and a 233 Schwitzer glider both of which are realworld skills. Additionally, to give you a picture of our school, we have 6% of our graduates
on average choosing military service. So, while that's not specifically CTE, it does show an additional pathway and that is three times the national average of young people graduating going into the military. These accomplishments address our
workforce needs. We know the global demand in the avi demand in the aviation sector is great. Um we're looking at need a need of over 600,000 pilots and technicians over the next decade and additionally 15,000 over the next couple
of years for the domestic pilot shortage. Our mission, vision, and values guide every decision we make at the academy. And we believe that excellence truly begins with both connection and upholding high expectations.
Every student is paired with a trusted adult where we get to uphold clear and high standards. For example, we don't issue D's. Our students get to earn A, B, C, or F. Our students get to earn 26
credits to graduate for their high school diploma where the state of Michigan requires 18. Our students also get the opportunity to give a 100 hours of community service as part of their diploma from the academy along with a required job shadowing uh
opportunity. Because we're located at an airport, you can imagine the unique opportunities that get to come our way. We believe that students need a lot of exposure during their formative years and so that is a key element of our academy.
Students have access to our direct flight line. Um we also have access to the airport public safety and we have an incredible amount of guests that get to visit our students to share different career opportunities within the aviation
and engineering sectors. We've even had students um test for landmines with a partner at the airport as well. However, these partnerships extend beyond the airport. We have our wonderful charter authorizer
Grand Valley State University um who also along with other post-secaries give our students dual credit for the CTE programs in which they participate. All of our aviation programs are statec
certified in CTE. Additionally, we've also taken the lead in the state of Michigan in working with um other partners to help develop the CTE standards for aviation general and professional pilot programs.
I'm very proud to say that 66% of our juniors and seniors are involved in CTE at our academy. My hope today is that I can share the West Michigan Aviation Academy with you as a national model um that can show
what is possible when you have business and industry, private partnerships, and public education coming together for the central mission of serving our young people. It truly does create a pathway
to career for our young people as they get to experience all that's in front of them. Again, thank you so much for the opportunity. I look forward to your questions. >> Thank you very much. Under committee rule 9, we'll now question witnesses under the fiveminut rule. And I'll first
recognize myself uh for five minutes. And I just want to thank all our witnesses. Really inspiring testimony. I think a big part of what we do on this subcommittee uh apart from the policy levers we have is to showcase just truly tremendous uh examples of what's going on at school districts across the
country and as Mrs. Gasper just said uh what you're doing uh what all of you are doing really provides a national model that I hope uh can be an a source of inspiration uh in in every state. So I do want to just briefly address off the top this issue of the inter agency agreements and the Perkins uh program.
Um and so Mr. uh goats, you raised a number of of criticisms of this and and the ranking member as well, and I don't want to dismiss that. I want to really try to understand it. I think there's probably room for debate whether the chain of authority that you described is exactly as you described it. Uh certainly if there are issues accessing
the grants, that's something that needs to get worked out uh quickly. Uh but as far as sort of your broader critique, the problem as you describe it seems to be that well do is going to have to talk to the education department and they're going to have to call each other back and forth. But kind of the entire premise of CTE programs is we want to
have this connection and coordination between schools and and industry, right? So so what's wrong with sort of recapitulating that or mirroring that uh in terms of fostering greater coord coordination between the department of education and do?
>> Well, I think in >> you push the >> Okay, turn your mic. There you go. >> In past administrations, we've had a lot of close coordination between the two departments, including in Mr. Trump's first term. They met constantly and we were often collaborating on issues where we intersect. Registered apprentichip is
an example of that. In Mr. Trump's first term, the department put out a guide to aligning CTE with apprenticeship. In Mr. Biden's term, we put out a memo about registered apprenticeship being an allowable use of Perkins funds. So, we have had that collaboration and
cooperation. We don't need to do it through an inter agency agreement where we transfer the entire program over to another off another agency. >> All right. Well, thank you um Dr. Volzer. Um, thank you very much for your testimony and um, a point you made that
I think is really important is just the way things are changing so fast in the work in the workplace right now uh, when it comes to AI and robotics and and everything else that you need to sort of have that perspective like in real time in order to have your programs really be serving the needs of our workforce. Um,
I guess the challenge is that because things are changing so rapidly, what students learn in CTE programs may quickly, you know, become not applicable to the workforce as it exists one, two, three, five years from now. Now, they'll be gaining additional skills once they're in the workforce. Uh, but that seems to me like the fundamental
challenge is how do we structure these programs uh in an era where we know that students once they graduate from them are going to be in a rapidly evolving uh workforce. >> Thank you for your question. And I think that really is where it comes down to
deep integration with local industry and alignment to education. Not only how the programs are designed, but making sure that the skills that are being taught in those classrooms are directly applicable inside the four walls of industry. One
of the things thatme prime program does specifically is we do a a significant amount of research into the industries, the e equipment that's being used, the processes that are being used, the new technologies that are being integrated and make sure that that same exact
equipment is inside the walls of the high school so that when they step into that they are productive day one. They are continuing to learn and in fact they're bringing innovation. That is what the next generation of learners. not just about the technical skills.
It's not just about uh the academic skills. It's not just about those workplace ready skills. It's the innovation that the next generation is bringing because they are comfortable with technologies. Um and that is what is inspiring the next uh adoption of technologies uh inside our our our
classrooms. And so I would say to me this is while you look at national systemic issues of and we really have to pay attention to our small to medium-sized manufacturers, they often can't step outside their four walls to really engage with academic uh education
leaders. We have to make sure that we're reaching inside those four walls so that we can align and make sure there is that continuous education um and skill ready development. >> Very well said. Thank you. And I I guess that sort of uh capacity to adapt and
innovate within a particular domain is itself sort of the core skill set in many cases that you're trying to uh to teach. Uh Mrs. Rice, just very quickly, I was uh very excited to to read your and hear your testimony. I know that we've had big shortages when it comes to cyber security and so I wanted to just ask a little bit more about the pathway
because I think a lot of people think that well cyber security is just kind of an offshoot of software engineering or some other field. Not true at all. Right. So what is sort of the distinct nature of your pathway and the and the needs that it fills? >> Um my pathway cyber security I mean
there's a huge skills gap and there's currently over 600,000 jobs that are open right now across the nation. So um and personally in my path pathway in Virginia uh we we have a three course pathway including um we have an intro
class, we have a you know a networking class and then we have a more advanced class and it it gets the kids prepared for the security plus and the um net plus. >> Thank you very much. I'll now recognize the uh ranking member. >> Uh thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you to the witnesses. Wonderful testimony
all of you. I appreciate it. I I want to follow up on the chairman's question about the pace of change. And M Mr. Gats, you said in your in your written testimony that job training is not CTE and CTE is not job training. And in fact, you cited an article from 1986 in
which experts recommended abandoning wrote entry level job training and reforming what was then called vocational education as you explained um to integrate academics, teach teamwork, critical thinking skills, and here's a quote from your testimony. prepare young
people for a world working life of continual learning, problem solving, and communicating. And and I couldn't agree more. Uh and I submit even more critical today than it was in 1986 with the pace of change. Things are very different than they were in 1986 or there were
there were no computers in classrooms in 1986. Students didn't have cell phones. We didn't have AI. It's a different world. and preparing students for the jobs of the future is not the same because we don't know what the jobs of the future will look like. It's very different. And CTE is important and
beneficial because as I mentioned, it's typically this hands-on project-based learning. And you know, when you look at the 21st century job skills, collaboration, critical thinking, communication, confidence, creativity, those are skills that matter no matter
what path someone takes or no matter what job someone goes into. So I I I we need to strengthen this and realize the why CTE is important and it's not what this administration is doing. They're kind of stuck I think back in 1986 when is 2025. So so Mr. Gets the statutory
requirements for Perkins program include academic achievement measures alignment with post-secondary programs of study support services that are embedded in educational institutions and then transitions between secondary and post-secary education. These are all elements that presume administration in
an education focused agency as you mentioned. So is it correct though? 77% of states implement CTE through their state education agency that K12 14% through post-secary education and 6% through standalone CTE agencies.
>> That's correct. >> That sound right. >> So will those state entities be better served by the Department of Education or by the Department of Labor? uh by the Department of Education with whom they've had a relationship for many years >> and and the staff at the Department of
Education who were accustomed to this work and and also Mr. We've heard reports that the transfer of funding and administration has already caused some serious problems. As you mentioned, at least four states have reported they could not access Perkins formula grant
funding during the transition period uh when um OCTAE attempted to move grantees from education's payment to the DO's payment management system. And some states have reported delays in receiving their pay account numbers needed to access their formula Perkins funding.
And other states have had challenges getting bank accounts to even be recognized by the new payment system. Other requirements like wet signatures. All these things are creating significant challenges in accessing formula dollars since the transition was uh initiated. And all of this suggests
the transition from the department of education to the department of labor has failed. So could all of this have been avoided if the Perkins formula grants were still administered by the Department of Education? >> Absolutely. They've made it harder to get uh Perkins funds than it is to get a mortgage.
>> And and I just I want to emphasize too that this committee has worked hard on the workforce innovation opportunity act and other workforce programs. And those are important. I'm not minimizing those, but they're not the same as educational programs such as the CTE programs that are mentioned. And we heard some great
examples today. I think they're wonderful. There are so many uh industry partnerships that are happening. But again, the focus needs to be on career and technical education. It's not career and tech technical job training. And it's even more critical with CTE at
middle schools and high schools. Again, we don't know what the jobs will look like. Um, so Dr. Vultzer, U. Mrs. Rice, and Miss Gasper, do you agree with M Mr. Gats that career technical education is
education? Anybody disagree with that? Go ahead. Anybody do you all agree that is an educational program, career and technical education. It's more of an educational program than a job training program.
>> Go ahead, Dr. V. I'm almost out of time, so go ahead. >> Sorry. I I think it is you can't separate the two. Education to align with skills that secure sustainable thriving waged occupations should be the goal of education.
Building a well-rounded individual is absolutely critical when we talk about workforce ready skills. It is those critical thinking, problem solving, >> and and quickly in maybe one sentence, your thoughts on the education aspects of CTE, Mrs. Rice and Mrs. Gasper
because I'm I'm out of time. Maybe one sentence. Um, I think when we when we look at what we get to do through career and tech ed, it's really determined at our local level in terms of the educational component piece. >> Thank you.
I I really am out of time. I'll yield back. Thank you. >> Uh, thank you. I will now recognize the chair of the full committee, Mr. Wahberg. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for this uh this hearing and thank you for the panel being here. I'm I'm tempted to ask how many of you educators
that are here at the table noticed anything negative coming from the seven-week shutdown by my Democrat colleagues in the Senate when the Department of Education was shut down for seven weeks. I won't ask that question. Um I'd also
say thank you to my uh my colleague from Oregon for showing us what a state can do in CTE. Amazing things by itself, the state doing the work. um knowing what they need in their own state of Oregon. And I think the same is true in Michigan
and Virginia and the students here in the room can attest to that as well. Um Dr. Voszer, you work closely with industry partners. You've said that. Um what strategies, best strategies have you shown to work and be effective for
sustaining employer participation in your CTE programs? And again, as I said at the beginning, when we look at developing out these program, we're looking at locally what the needs are for those industry partners, what equipment, what skills uh
and what future technologies are being uh integrated into that environment, into that local so that we can best support those local uh entities. Um but that grows beyond that. What employers are finding is understanding demand signals and working closely with their
education partners to ensure that those not only those programs align but the duration uh the the durability of those programs align to the demand signals of their industry. So those are some of the things that we look at once the uh they
also do the evaluation at the end to ensure that what is produced through our education systems is aligned to the needs and not only just immediate needs of employment but securing that continuous education um that ensures
that our industries uh you know grow with uh the economic needs of our nation. so key that continuous understanding of its continuous education for a lifetime but being up close and personal as you've said customizing what fits with business and
industry. Thank you so much. Um Mr. Rice um how do you incorporate artificial intelligence tools specifically uh into cyber security education and what guidance or resources do teachers need to do that responsibly? that human moral
touch on AI. >> Thank you for the question. Um integrating um artificial intelligence in my class um is essential. So um first I I use AI for hands-on um learning um for hands-on problem solving with my uh
students with uh capture the flag um activities. So we will um first use it to AI assisted analysis um of challenges uh whether they review a log or decode patterns um and then I
push them to val validate those results as well to make sure um that they're doing that manually so they're not just depending on that AI analysis. Um I also create AI fishing emails or have them um
evaluate deep fakes. Um but it's important by letting them see AI from an adversar's perspective. Um they develop a deeper understanding um why ethical decision- making uh bias awareness and human oversight isn't important as
technical skills. Uh we use it more as a tool um so that the students can understand it, evaluate and um use it thoughtfully. Um, I also use, um, AI in my classroom to personalize learning. Um, especially
in a rural school, we have a lot of, um, kids that want to take my class that might feel like they're intimidated by it because their learning level is not where it needs to be. Um, so I will use it for differentiation and um, it helps
make complex concepts like scripting and digital forensics and malware analysis. Um, for many of them it makes it feel it more cyber security is more accessible. >> Wow. Well, thank you. Thank you. May you continue to succeed on that.
Miss Casper, I I had the opportunity of touring your school and wishing that it was in my district. I can't have everything good in Michigan in my district, but I'm glad you're there. Could you tell us a little more about the school? I would assume most of the students are from upwardly bound uh home
set settings, high incomes and all of the rest. Uh is that true? >> Actually, that's not true. Um so that is one of the >> I set you up for that one. >> Thank you for that. That is one of uh
the biggest misunderstandings actually. Um, being a public charter high school in Michigan, we serve every type of child. Um, and we accept all children that apply. Unfortunately, or fortunately, however
you want to look at it, we um have more student applications than spots available. And so last year, as an example, we had double the amount of freshman applications than the spots available. Um, so while that's a
blessing, it's also unfortunate that we can't serve every child. >> It's working. We'll we'll push for choice, more choice. So, thank you. I yield back. >> Representative Lee of Pennsylvania is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Republicans can't simultaneously hold a
hearing about uh how to strengthen students skills through career and technical education while also allowing this administration to dismantle the sole agency task with expanding the same students educational opportunities and protecting their civil rights. In May,
the Department of Education transferred the Office of Career Technical and Adult Education's programs to the Department of Labor. Yesterday, we found out that the Trump administration plans to transfer many more of the Department of Education's core programs to four completely different agencies, uh,
flouting congressional authorization to effectively dismantle the department and abandon public education. This has been a key part of the administration's authoritarian playbook from day one. One thing history makes clear is that we will not successfully strengthen career
and technical education if we don't have a body that is invested in its equity. We value all career paths, whether it's a trade or working in the arts, a career in science. They're all important, but we also can't ignore that vocational education was conceived as a tool of
segregation to track students uh particularly of color into training programs for jobs that were then deemed undervalued. that are physically intensive, that lower life expecties while reserving what people deemed prestigious academics uh for wealthy
white students. Even within career and technical education today, white students are more likely to have access to manufacturing and information technology pathways while black and brown students are placed in classes for now devalued professions like hospitality or tourism. One of the
reasons the Department of Education exists is to help states and schools address these educational inequities. This is literally one of the reasons why Congress tked the Department of Education with administering Perkins and other career and technical education programs. Mr. gets. Aside from the fact
that it's a direct attempt to dismantle the Department of Education without congressional approval, will transferring the administration of Perkins to the Department of Labor exacerbate uh segregated pathways that disproportionately track students of color into undervalued careers?
>> Well, as I mentioned, um methods of administration is a proactive civil rights monitoring that state Perkins agencies are supposed to be doing um to address some of the issues that you're talking about. We have no idea what the where those responsibilities lie now with this the change that they've done
in the IAA. >> So the Department of Labor is not equipped to handle issues of educational equity. It's not equipped to primarily handle issues of education at all. We've also uh already seen the DO's level of investment in equit and equitable access to job training when they tried to
eliminate job core this past spring. Now, the Pittsburgh Job Corps has long been a beacon of opportunity uh for young folk in my district, especially disenfranchised uh young people, black and brown and lowincome young people. And after seeing what the DL tried to take away from them, why should we have
faith that they'll treat Perkins any differently? Republicans also love to re to reframe the removal of equitable education opportunities as an expansion of choice. So when we see an increased focus on choosing career and technical education, we need to be asking what it
might be replacing. For example, we're seeing more instances where financial literacy classes fulfill a social studies requirement. Mr. Guess if career and technical education is administered by the Department of Labor, will it be more difficult to ensure that all young
people have access to a holistic well-rounded education that can include academics or STEM and career and technical uh training and education? >> I'm very concerned that we will lower academic expectations for students in career and technical education if it remains at the Department of Labor.
>> Thank you. As the wealthiest nation on earth, we should be able to offer holistic education to all children. Right? Robust career uh and technical education shouldn't come at the expense of foundational academics. Students need and deserve both. Uh and we can't let an
administration that doesn't value education pit one against the other. Any hearings about how to strengthen federal education programs while this administration is actively dismantling the Department of Education are a waste of students, families uh and educators
time. We should be focused on what we plan to do to keep the department uh and its programs intact. I thank you uh all for your time and I yield back. >> Representative Mesmer of Indiana is recognized. >> Thank you, Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses for being here today. Uh,
Miss Miss Gasper, um, you've worked in both regional service agencies and CTE development. What can we do to help share innovative CT models between states? >> Thank you for the question. Um, I think really it comes down to what do the
communities need and so focusing there um, should be a be our first uh, goal. In addition to that, once we see in terms of placebased what's needed, then being able to leverage partners. Um, so for example, the partnerships that we've
been able to leverage have been able to come about because we've been so clear about our mission, vision, and values and what we need um in order to serve our young people. So in addition to that, once once you have that clarity, then partners can decide how how they
fit into that mission. Um I also think it's important to think about the mutual partnerships. So when you have uh career and teched in public schools and then you have business and industry partners, what are the mutual benefits to both? So
for example, um we have a tenant that leases space from us, which is incredibly unique. So as a public school, we have a private business named Mayday Avionics. It's an avionics company that leases space for from us so
that they can um the the importance of that is that our students can actually see real business and industry be able to work on aircrafts while our young people are sitting in the classrooms looking through the glass walls. So in terms of looking at partnerships, it's
really about being clear about what the community needs and then being able to solidify those partnerships. Okay. Thank you. Uh, what can Congress do to help take away the stigma of students wanting to choose vocational careers versus traditional four-year degree uh, careers
and elevate the value of high high demand, high pay technical careers. >> I think it's what you're doing right now. It's being able to showcase successful models for others to be able to learn from. So, for example, I've been in public education my entire
career of 30 years. Um, being at the academy has tremendously renewed my faith in public education because so many of the barriers to innovation have been removed. Um, we have it starts with
let me just backtrack. It's all about the people, right? It's being able to come together with a group of people who are passionate and willing and able to focus around a single mission, vision, and set of values. And so coming at a
coming to a public charter school um where you have an appointed board who is solely there to serve that mission is very different. It allows the school leader like myself and the leadership team to be able to focus on the
important work every day for our young people. And additionally, I think if we can showcase these models, which we do, we have tours coming in all the time. We have people fly in from different states. We have other school leaders visit us and say, "How can we do what
you're doing? How can you scale? How can we duplicate?" It comes down to it's about the people. It's about finding that single mission. What is it you're trying to accomplish? And then taking away all the whatifs, taking away the excuses of why we can't
do this with and for our families. So, I appreciate that we're being showcased, not not we as in the academy, but we as in these are models for others to be able to learn from. >> Thank you. Uh Mrs. writes, "What's being
done in your field uh in the K2 through 12 space to scale up programs like yours in Virginia? >> Can you repeat that?" >> Oh, yeah. What What are What are you able to do to help scale up the programs you're doing across Virginia and and and cyber security to other parts of the
country? Any anything? >> Um I showcase what I do. Um and I get my students out there doing things. Um, and by just telling talking about what I'm doing in the classroom and what I'm doing outside of the classroom with my
students really helps showcase what we're doing. Um, we also bring awareness. We have a great initiative in Virginia, the Virginia Cyber Range, which is a cloud hosted virtual environment that all our schools can use um to practice these safe
these these skills, cyber security skills in a safe environment. So, um, but just talking about what we're doing in Virginia and sharing it across the nation >> and helping other educators, um, do what I'm doing in their states.
>> Yep. Thank you for your responses and I yield back. Representative Manion of New York is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to our witnesses uh, for joining us here today. I'm very excited about this subject of today's hearing because career and technical education is expanding rapidly
in central New York and we have a great history of innovation and technology in the region that has served this country's well this country well and made us a leader around the world a legacy that we must continue by an
investment in our public schools and our higher education institutions. Um, with the growth of major industries like advanced manufacturing and semiconductor chip manufacturing, our region has launched transformative CTE initiatives,
including an advanced technology framework that's being piloted across 10 of our local school districts. This unique program will provide hundreds of students annually with a curriculum focused on real world skills and meeting
the employment demands of our local employers and future employers. Um, these hundreds of students uh have a curriculum that's focused on real world skills, experimental learning, and this includes our newly uh opened regional
steam school, the first of its kind, a countywide school drawing 60% of its students from the Syracuse City School District and the remaining students from the rest of the county. unique, innovative programs exist at this school and were designed uh by many of our
local employers. Additionally, our five high schools in the Syracuse City School District have unique technology programs. Um the city of Syracuse is one of the most impoverished cities in the country. So my concern is around title
one funds making sure that we meet the needs of that school district and provide continuing pathways out of poverty for our students in these high demand fields. Um, additionally, the state of New York, the governor has created a program which I supported,
called Reconnect New York, where individuals that are pursuing a second career between the ages of 25 and 55, uh, pursuing a career in a high demand field can attend community colleges without any cost. Um, I'm confident that
these initiatives will serve as national models for career and technical education. Certainly, it shows that it is possible that when states, education, employers, labor unions all have a seat at the table, great things happen. And
this is just the beginning. As our partnerships deepen, there'll be more opportunities for work-based learning, uh, union endorsed apprenticeship programs, and other models that create pathways to highquality jobs. As I said
before, my concern is that in shifting the Perkins program out of the Department of Education and uh concerns about making sure that these funds go to impoverished communities as they are intended for, that a Hunger Games is not
created and rubrics are not created for funding to states that states like New York that have a commitment to civil rights will be left behind and will fall short on that rubric. We have seen this in other programs in this administration. So with that in mind, uh my question is
for Mitzer Gats. Given the momentum behind these regional partnerships and the demand for skilled talent, what are the most effective models that you found of work-based learning and youth apprenticeship programs and adult apprenticeship programs at high school or community colleges le level
especially in fast growing sectors like advanced manufacturing, the skilled trades, healthcare and others. So what are the most effective models? Well, let let me answer your question first of all by saying the the best way to promote more work-based learning opportunities
in this country is to make sure that every school district has a Perkins allocation that's large enough to support a work-based learning coordinator. Um, that's going to take a bigger investment, but it's about time that we did that. Everyone is polarized about a lot of things, but not CTE. Now
is the time to increase funding for for Perkins. Um, in answer to your question about models, there's a great program in Suriri at Suriri Community College in um, rural northern North North Carolina. They've created a um, for young people a
a CTE dual enrollment program in health. Um, young people complete by high school graduation a um, a certified nurse assistant uh, credential. Then they go on and they enter at Suriri Community College a registered apprenticeship that
is combined with a nursing degree program they are getting and because the north state of North Carolina waves tuition for apprenticeships um they're getting a free ride a nursing degree getting paid while they do it. It's outstanding program and we need more of them.
>> Thank you Mr. Gats. I appreciate I yield back Mr. Chair. Mr. Moan of Guam is recognized. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Uh, one of our career trade uh, education programs is is run by our Guam Trades Academy or our Guam Contractors Association, our trades
academy. Uh, and they recognize our emergency our emerging leaders committee, our young professionals under 40. And they conduct regular alter programs with the middle schools and high schools. And how they how they attract our our young kids is through
two main events. one in spring. It's called Pizza Pop Empowered Tools. It's aimed at encouraging girls and women to enter the trades. And then in the fall, we have construction warriors. That's aimed at recruiting both boys and men's and girls and women to enter construction careers. Now the trade
academy was developed around also working adults and it works very well for high schoolers because they treat them like adults and because the academy is developed around people also without diplomas also works well with people who
speak English as a secondary language. So, our trace academy uh has a partnership also with our Guam department of education and as a pilot program uh where they're assisting trouble students to go through the trades academy and students must
finish their certification and their high school diploma. Uh these troubled students 11 out of 12 of them graduate and one on the honor roll and despite entering the program with poor attendance records and grades. So, the Guam Trades Academy annual e uh
annual evening classes at high school integrates into the the adult classes and its goal is to earn credentials to get employed above the minimum wage and to graduate high school. So, those high school students who graduate had jobs
right out of school. And the Trades Academy has been successful in getting females into construction as well. uh the national centers of uh construction and education research serves as the basis for the Guam's trades academy and god programs and it's
highly successful. Right now we have 362 people in this class in the trades academy and recently we started a welding program which cost a lot of money and building up also a diesel mechanic class. The Guam's Trade Academy is also looking into starting up a fiber optics and elevator repairs too. And the
trades academy is working with Alaska, Hawaii and an army base in Korea. So the bottom line for our Guam trades academy and states and territories is need for more authority and latitude in determining spending for CTE programs
because there are closer to the problem and trades academy at times doesn't pursue funding because there's just too many strings attached to that. So first question is for Dr. Bulls and manufacturing remains a significant
effect affected by skilled gaps. And we have a a new manufacturing company on Guam also. I helped cut the ribbon just the other month. It's called Appliant Science Tech Research or Astro. It's a 3D additive manufacturer. And so, Dr. Bzer, could you elaborate on how
industries identify regional workforce needs and aligns them with local training programs? Thank you for your question and congratulations on the ribbon cutting of that exciting uh industry. Um one of the things that we do and I'm going to speak
specifically to a program that we haveme has launched and it has launched nationally uh and that is called the manufacturing imperative workforce pipeline challenge. We are working with 25 colleges across 17 states. And when you talk about scaling uh and and
finding out best practices and sharing those, we're doing it in multiple ways. And I promise I'm going to get to your question. Uh one of the things, as I've said, that we do is that we really look at industry needs currently, industry demands, future demands for that area.
And we look at the demography of that area. Who is inside the classroom? Who is not inside the classroom? And how do we make sure that we are supporting the local economy by making sure everyone has accessible opportunities to g gain the skills needed to uh enter into
living wage uh occupations. We do this also as well by these presidents across these 25 institutions. Community colleges meet uh quarterly and they engage in addressing the questions of what are the policies, what are the funding barriers that are preventing
them from doing what they set out to do which is educate um their communities with the right skills to secure living wage jobs. From that also we uh integrate with the manufacturing association so that we understand what the needs are from a state perspective.
On top of that we bring inmemes national perspective. what do we know industry needs? What are they adopting? How do we help integrate that? So, we are looking nationally and we are uh catalyzing locally, we are understanding locally
and we are scaling nationally. And so those are some of the efforts that we do uh congressman to make sure that when we enter in and understand the needs of industry not just immediate but it's it's industry but it's also what are the needs of the demography that are going
to be working inside those four walls. What are the best programs? What are the skills gap? What are the job uh you know trajectories for those individuals to continue to uh sustain that employment there? grow the economy and bring more industry uh to those uh communities.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I'm looking forward to the CTA programs having more authority. Thank you. >> Representative Adams of North Carolina is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today. Before I get to my questions, I do want to take a moment to address a crisis
facing my district. Over the weekend, the Trump administration deployed Customs and and Border Patrol agents to Charlotte, North Carolina, arriving in unmarked cars uh without badges, dressed in body armor, wielding assault rifles, and and they actually terrorize our
community. Many of my law-abiding constituents, regardless of their immigration status, were afraid to go to church, work, and even school uh because of the language they speak or the color of their skin. One of my constituents, a US citizen, had his car window bashed
out, dragged onto the street, pinned down, and put in handcuffs even though he is a US citizen. This is disgusting behavior and frankly unamerican. But this mass deportation agenda is not only a moral crisis for our country. It's also an education crisis for our
students and and our teachers. On Monday morning, almost 27,000 Charlotte Meckler students were absent from school. That's 21% of the entire student population afraid to use their constitutionally protected right to a high quality public
education because of the Trump administration's campaign of terror. If this many students were missing school for any other reason, I'm sure that this committee would be coming together to hold the hearing. I think it's shameful that we're not doing that. Another dangerous uh action that was announced
just recently yesterday uh by the Trump administration is a plan to eliminate the Department of Education without the consent of Congress uh using the Economy Act and which is unprecedented. It's shameful that that we my colleagues on
the other side of the aisle are unwilling to assert congressional authority here. Mr. gets during your 20 years of of service at the Department of Education, what experience did you have with inter agency uh inter agency
agreements and and have you seen any inter agency agreement used at such a large scale and do you think the agreements announced yesterday are lawful? >> Um, I've never seen anything like this. It's unprecedented. And when I first saw it and read it, I thought, well, that's why the secretary fired all the lawyers
in the department. >> Wow. Uh listen, moving these programs to agencies without experience in education policy will lead to worse outcomes for our students. I'm sure you agree with that. In July, the Trump administration
moved management uh of the Perkins Career and Technical Education to the Department of Labor. You mentioned in your testimony that there are inefficiencies with how this administration is implementing the Perkins CTE program. essentially you've got two agencies
working on one program. So can you highlight uh for us some examples where this redundancy is creating obstacles for grantees and specifically how has this transfer of administration and funds made it more difficult uh for the
states? >> Well, we still have states struggling to get access to their funds after two months after this transfer happened. Um, I I watched the web the one-hour webinar that explained in the 75 slide presentation all the things you have to
do to get access to your money. Um, I don't understand why the Department of Education, which has had a relationship with these state agencies for what, decades, couldn't have transferred their information over to this new contractor. Why are we putting people through this?
>> Well, listen, I I have that same question. Well, do you think that that grantees with fewer resources like H.B.CU applying for Augustus Hawkins grants will have an even harder time navigating the Trump administration's new framework? Uh, what do you think about
that? >> Well, I'm I'm very concerned about the people that worked on the Hawkins program and make sure that they continue to stay working on the Hawkins program. I'm not sure about their fate, but those are experts that really help applicants devise good applications and make good
use of the funds. Wow. So, one of the important facets of a quality apprentichip program like registered apprenticeship programs is the embedded quality standards like the minimum hours of an on the job training and classroom instruction. So, do you have any
recommendations on how to expand access to registered apprenticeships to historically disenfranchised groups? >> I I sure do. Um, last year uh the House and the Senate um agreed on a a we conference a we owe a reauthorization
bill that included a $65 million youth apprenticeship readiness grant program. I hope that gets revived in this Congress. Other things that we can do is better articulate CTE with apprenticeship. Right now, we don't really talk about apprenticeship in the Perkins Act. And if we have I I mean I
think things like let's let's challenge districts to align their uh upper level CTE programs with the related instruction and apprenticeship. Let's create a dual enrollment program for apprenticeship where young people can get credit and get advanced standing in
an apprenticeship after leaving high school. >> Thank you, sir. And Mr. Chair, I yield back. I'm out of time. Thank you. >> Representative Owens of Utah is recognized. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, our first of all, thank you guys for being here. Uh, I love to see innovation. uh was so well
needed and I'm glad we're that that that space we're we're embracing it big time. Our children are the most precious resources uh we have and we want them to live the best of their lives and CT helps them this possible giving our students the opportunity to experiment with careers before graduating from high
school so they are more knowledgeable of their own interests and aptitudes. CT also uh offers students a chance to build tangible practical skills for use in life and work in the workforce in the workplace. In Utah, for instance, uh uh
Jordan school district has used CTE to change lives. Students enrolled in CTE courses at Jordan at uh and have a higher graduation rate than the general population of students. In addition, Jordan has provided over 16,000 credentials of value and 10,000 credits
for students that will serve them as they continue education and development. Furthermore, six out of 10 students plan to uh to pursue a career related to CT course work they've done. These lives have been changed forever for the better and I believe that Jordan school
district and their hardworking CT teachers deserve recognition and thanks for the impact they're making. So with that, I'd like to start my questioning. I want to first of all direct my first question to Dr. Bozer, Mrs. Rice, and Mrs. Gasper. Um, we keep hearing uh my
my colleagues, my Democratic colleagues about the strong disapproval of inter agency agreements signed between the Department of Education and Department of Labor. I'm trying to get a sense of whether there's anything to this noise um that they're making. You are the innovators. You're out there making
these things happen. you're on the ground in classrooms developing programs, creating critical partnerships and reporting strong outcomes. Uh would each of you like to please answer this? Does inter agency agreements at all affect your programming, your work or
your outcomes? We'll start off with Dr. Bzer. >> I want to start by saying nearly a hundred years ago 33 tooling engineers came together to do something bigger than themselves. knowing that our nation
uh required us to do more. Um I think uh opportunities to collaborate to innovate but to ensure that funding is still uh you know maintained uh for these programs is critical to our nation.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you for the question. Um, as a classroom educator, my focus, my focus is delivering the highest quality learning experience for my students, regardless of where funding is administered. Uh, what matters most um
to me is that CTE programs will continue to receive stable, consistent support um so that students have access to tools and technology >> [clears throat] >> um and opportunities that they need. Um, I will continue to advocate for strong resources, industry alignment, and
hands-on learning. Um but my my commitment is to maintaining uh the quality of my cyber security program um remains the same. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Similar to um what they just said, my
primary focus is on ensuring that we have excellence across all of our programs, including our CTE programs. Um it sure would be nice if we could see some continued innovation at the federal level. Um, I'm not someone who tries to
predict what will happen and live in fear, but instead I try to embrace the opportunity to see what type of new innovation can can come out of it. So, um, I would also like to not have to fight for every dollar that we get. Um,
so having more control locally would be amazing. >> More control locally is coming your way. Um, and so is innovation. I just want to say this real quickly. I'm reading here Google um Biden inter uh inter agency
agreements use it extensively um for wind off offshore wind wind energy and to allow the states to combine their plans with Perkins v. So just know this is not something new and I tell you the fact that we're talking and innovating figure out how how to do
it better is just the way it should always be. Um, Miss Rice, you helped design Virginia's uh cyber security pathway. What mechanisms should school districts have in place ensure that curriculum standards align with industry certificates, certifications, and
employment needs? >> Um, thank you for the question. Um, aligning yourself with industry partners. I know something, um, in Virginia, we actually just did this last week, is we just reviewed and rewrote our competencies for our cyber security
course. Um we do that every three to five years based on the course. Um and we we have uh higher education in the room. We have uh industry uh partners in the room and we have other high school teachers. So we we just make sure that
it's always updated and re and fresh. >> Thank you. I just want to say thank you again for innovators. Uh well overdue. If we don't innovate, we die. So thank you. We're going to make we're going to make this a great uh future for our kids. So appreciate that. Thank you. I'll go back. Uh, Representative Hayes of Connecticut is recognized.
>> Thank you and thank you to our witnesses for being here. Before I begin, I would like to address a question that the chair of the full committee asked and none of you had an answer for. Just to give it a little context, he asked, "How did the federal government shutdown
affect school districts?" And then followed up by saying, "It didn't." That is absolutely not true. School districts do not operate budgets on a week-to-eek basis. So much of the title one funds and the idea funds that support our special education students had already
been dispersed over the summer. So schools were already operating with that. Many school districts, especially title one districts that rely heavily on federal funding, saw delays in uh reimbursements for meal programs for
their free and reduced their students with free and reduced lunches and they had to direct funds from other places. We saw around the country Head Start programs that experienced closures or temporarily reduced services.
Again, Title One district saw uh um a halting of federal grant-making opportunities and technical assistance to support them with those grants as they plan for the next year. I can tell you that my friends at the Department of
Defense Education Activities, which is DODEA, our military schools, worked for several weeks without being paid and many of their extracurricular activities were halted. they still showed up. So, the students didn't feel the impact. But
if you ask them if there was any direct effect from the federal government, I'm sure that their answer would be different. And I think the thing that is most important and incredibly egregious is a constituent of mine who has a complaint with the Office of Civil
Rights for a transition program for her severely disabled son who will be graduating soon. and she needs to make sure that his supports are in place as he transitions. And she lost weeks of getting an answer or at least a a
meeting or a decision so that her son can transition out of high school. So for our most impacted students in our most vulnerable school districts, if you ask them if there is any impact for those teachers working in those
communities and those administrators trying to plan for the next year, they absolutely felt the effect of the last several weeks. I'm glad we're having this hearing today, but I also understand that this hearing is yet another example to try to
make the case for why we do not need a Department of Education. Um the the decision by this administration to cut CTE programs is deeply troubling for me and I know that the Department of Labor
excels at directing federal funds to short-term job training programs. But Miss Rice, I listened to your testimony and you talked about these programs as being a first experience, exploration, career development. Those are all things that educators do. I know this because I
am an educator if you can't tell already, but a person who has a cyber security background could not educate your students in the way that you did in the way that you do. Could not align that work to the standards. Could not make sure that they're exploring and having a club and different
opportunities. Miss Gasper, you talked about many of your students, the percentage that go on to the military. In my school, every student enrolled in a Perkins program also took the ASVAP tests, the practice test, and the actual test, and their guidance counselors
align them with the classes to make sure that if they didn't pass it the first time, they would pass it on their subsequent attempts. All of those things happen in schools and there should be uh conversation and collaboration between business and the workplace. But teaching is a profession and it is different and
just because someone runs a business doesn't mean that they can teach young people to love a career or have opportunities to explore to fail and try again. So I have a lot of questions but I already know the answer to many of these questions. So a lot of this is
rhetorical for me. Um, what we should be doing on this committee is finding ways to match teachers with partners in the business world so that they can bring that real life experience in real time to keep them updated. But we would be
hardpressed to think that someone who runs a successful business could stand in front of a classroom of high school students and transfer that knowledge and allow those kids to grasp that information. So, Miss Christie, I really appreciate what you said about you don't care where the money comes from. You just want to make sure it's there and
available for kids. But I hope you hold firmly to the last part of CTE and that is the education part and our kids deserve that aspect. >> My time is up. I have no questions. >> Uh the ranking member of the full
committee uh Representative Scott of Virginia is recognized. >> Thank [clears throat] thank you Mr. Chairman. Um before I got to Congress, I was involved in legislation involving job train job training and CTE. And one of the things
about CTE that was we focused on was the fact that we're not helping a student. We just give them a skill but not the basic education. And that that job they're trained for may become obsolete. and if they have no
background, basic education, um they would not have been well served. So, let me ask all of the um witnesses whether or not CTE is in addition to the basic education
or instead of the basic education. Miss Casper, you want to start? >> Sure. I would say it's in addition to uh the basic education and I think >> um >> this this good >> pardon
>> Mr. Gates >> absolutely it it should be something in addition to a a strong rigorous academic education >> rice. Yes, I agree with the is it addition is
>> the three components that ensure a CT CTE program is effective is academic, technical and employability skills. >> Okay. And Miss Gasper, do your students get a waiver on anything about the basics, a number of basic courses that
have to be taken for graduation? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Um, Mr. Gates, uh, you heard a question about inter agency agreements. Have you heard any have you heard of anything like what's happening in education in
terms of inter agency agreements? No, we used inter agency agreements to transfer funds to support an evaluation contract but at another agency or because our contracting agency was was backed up and we needed to use the contracting agency of another agency.
Those are the things that we use IAS for. We don't transfer entire programs across the federal government. >> Mr. Can you tell me what [clears throat] one of the problems with um the oldtime CTE is students got tracked?
Um we were advised when I was doing job training that you shouldn't track people. If if a student decides later in life, like junior or senior year, that they actually want to go to college, they should not be so deeply tracked
that that is not a good choice. That's not an available choice. Can you tell um the dangers of tracking students in the future in a CTE course that does not include the basics? >> Sure. We want every young person to be
prepared for further learning after high school regardless of what they choose to do. Um that's an important component of Perkins. You you were a leader in making sure Perkins focused on academics expectations for young people. um that I lost the question. I'm sorry.
>> Well, is the track tracking? >> Oh, tracking. Tracking. [clears throat] Well, I think we need to make sure that in ninth grade, young people have exposure to all careers, real opportunities to try them out, and then they make a choice in high school, what where they want to go, but they always
have a choice opportunity to change their mind. And so they have the academics that they can do whatever they want in their lives. >> And so CTE, like I said, is an addition to the basics, the number of math courses, English courses, and everything else. >> Absolutely.
>> Mr. Chairman, I yield back. >> I'll now recognize ranking member Bonamichi for closing remarks. >> Uh, thank you. Thank you very much to the witnesses. I I think it's been an excellent discussion and and I don't think there's any question uh that we all agree on the importance of career and technical education that that is
clear. Uh there is a a difference uh in in looking at career and technical education as education or looking at it as job training. I think we need to continue that conversation. Um I I also want to note the the the full committee chairman Mr. Wahberg talked about uh
complimented Oregon which I appreciate very much and I just want to note that Oregon runs its CTE programs through our higher education coordinating commission that worked with the department of education. Uh our workforce programs are one run like apprenticeships are run through our Bureau of Labor and
Industries but workforce and and uh career and technical education are our education and and I I know from listening to the testimony today especially Mr. That's with your years of experience at the Department of Education that the decision to transfer career and technical education programs
from the Department of Education to the to the Department of Labor was not made with students or educators or communities in mind. It's part of a political agenda of eliminating the Department of Education and and and that that to me is incredibly disappointing. Uh when the the people with expertise uh
are losing their jobs and the expertise is not there anymore. Um what was once a cohesive education rooted system designed to support lifelong learning is now being fractured between these two agencies. One that uh the administration wants to eliminate and two agencies have
different missions and different capabilities. And as I said in my opening statement, CTE is not simply about job training or placement. It's about building pathways for students from middle school through post-secary education and teaching them skills they can take into meaningful careers. And
that work demands experience. educators and robust academic alignment. Deep coordination with local communities is something that the Department of Education has long provided. We're already seeing the consequences. Delayed grants, disjointed program administration, the erosion of trust
from those on the ground trying to implement the programs. And I do want to note as well that Perkins doesn't set curriculum. That is done at the local level. There's a suggestion that Perkins or f the federal government is setting curriculum. We don't do that. that is up to the states and localities and I think
you could see by the the testimony today uh that it is local decisionmaking. It's the Perkins dollars help. They help with equipment. They help with the funding. And let's not forget the broader context that this move is part of this, as I said, the the strategy to dismantle the
Department of Education. And that's part of the Heritage Foundation's project 2025 is deeply concerning. This is not about job numbers or job training. If we care about student opportunity, if we care about educating students of today
to fill all of the jobs of tomorrow, we cannot allow this misguided transfer to stand. We should restore these programs at the Department of Education and require that future changes go through Congress, not through political back channels. So, Mr. Chairman, I sincerely hope that we can work together to
strengthen CTE programs, but especially I hope we can work together to counter this uh unprecedented power grab by the executive branch. This is not a decision that the executive branch can make on its own, but it's trying to. Congress needs to have a say. Uh, and I hope we can continue to talk about the harmful
effects that dismantling the Department of Education will have on today's children and future generations. So, I again appreciate all of your testimony and and the the great work that you're doing and I look forward to further conversations and I yield back the balance of my time.
>> Uh, thank you uh very much to our witnesses. I think this has been a great hearing. It's been uh really inspiring to learn more about the incredible work uh that you're doing uh and the exciting educational opportunities you're providing for young people that put them on a path uh to fulfilling careers and
provide a tremendous asset uh to our country. And thanks as well to the young people who are here as uh tremendous uh models. Uh look forward to meeting you guys here after the hearing and thanks for coming uh to DC. I also want to thank the members of the committee on both sides. Uh while we are not always
in total and complete harmony on every aspect of education policy, I uh am really encouraged that there is uh substantial bipartisan support uh for CTE. I think that for uh a while the pendulum swung way too far towards this mantra of college uh for all uh but now
it's starting to swing back. We have tremendous momentum for CTE across the country and we need to do everything we can here uh to keep that going. It's more important than ever now. Without objection, there being no further business, the committee stands adjourned. Part: 2
Ready? This subcommittee on workforce protection will come to order. I note that Aquar is present and without objection, the chair is authorized to call a recess at any time. Today's hearing will examine the E-Verify program and how it can empower legal
employment and protect American workers. Since the start of this year, our nation has had made unprecedented strides in the fight to secure the border. According to Border Patrol, crossings at our southwestern border have fallen 96%
from September of 2023 to September of this year. With the crisis at the border finally being addressed, it's also important that we look at another issue. ensuring that American workers have the protections they need and deserve to compete against unfair, illegal labor
that undercuts American workers wages. And not only is it American workers who are the victims here, it is all workers. If they are being paid under the table and not given proper workers compensation, medical coverage, they're a victim. If they are an American worker who's having their unfair their wages
unfairly undercut, they're a victim. Legitimate businesses across America are victims of unfair competition and social safety nets lose out on valuable resources. Programs like unemployment compensation don't get the the payments they deserve
to provide for all legal workers across our country. One way to address that issue is through the expanded use of E-Verify. E-Verify is a free, reliable, and proven program run by the Department of Homeland Security or DHS, which helps
employers verify that they are hiring only those with a legal right to work in America. Everify helps protect Americans from having their wages undercut by bad actors hiring unauthorized workers. It also helps to provide a level playing
field for those employers that are doing the right thing. and it treats American workers with respect and dignity. Since 1986, the American or the Immigration and Nationality Act has prohibited employers from knowingly hiring or
employing unauthorized workers. Under the law, all employees and employers must complete an I-9 form and employers must review and verify documents establishing the identity and employment authorization of the employee. However,
an employer often cannot know the information and documents received from a worker are valid. This is where E-Verify comes in. An employer can verify a worker's employment authorization electronically in a matter of seconds through the Social Security Administration database and if
necessary, the DHS employment authorization database. An employer has no civil or criminal liability when relying in good faith on information pro provided through the verify confirmation system. Approximately 98% of the time
the employer will receive a result that employment is authorized. When there is a mismatch, the employer informs the worker who has 10 days to take action to resolve that mismatch. The Ever Verify program is voluntary for most employers
and there are more than 1.4 million enrolled. A growing number of states require all or some employees in their state to use E-Verify. Adding E-Verify requirements for employees is has bipartisan support. In
2019, I was the prime sponsor of Act 75 in Pennsylvania, the Construction Industry Employee Verification Act. And that was as a member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives that I authored that legislation that became law. This legislation had the support of both
labor and business groups. and it passed with strong bipartisan support, veto proof majorities in both chambers of the legislature. And Act 75 helps ensure there is lawful workforce construction in the construction industry in the home my home state of Pennsylvania,
protecting American workers from unfair competition, providing that level playing field that businesses are looking for, and helping to confirm all appropriate taxes are paid. Our witnesses from the construction and homebuilding industries will share their experiences and their perspectives on
how mand mandatory e-verify in their states and industries has worked for them. They will also discuss the need to enhance workforce development to bolster the American workforce in these industries. We can build on these lessons to ensure that more American
workers than ever before are given the critical protections they deserve. An area where mandatory E-Verify also makes sense is for federal contractors. We should be using E-Verify for all federal contractors. But under current
regulation, not even statute, only under current regulation, only large federal contracts must use E-Verify. Small dollar contracts and short-term contracts are excluded. That's why I've introduced HR2641, the day one dollar1 E-Verify Act to
codify a requirement that all federal contractors use E-Verify. We should all agree that businesses providing services to the federal government and being paid with taxpayer dollars must verify their workers as lawful. We also know that E-Verify is not perfect and so we want
to work to improve the system. Fraud can still occur through the use of stolen social security numbers and other forms of identity theft, but Everify remains a common sense win for the American people. It helps employers comply with the law while advancing the public
policy goals of ensuring a lawful workforce, protecting American workers and guaranteeing a level playing field for businesses hiring legal workers. With that, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. And now, I yield to the ranking member for her opening statement.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for your testimony today. Welcome back, everyone. I hope my colleagues across the aisle are rested from their 8-week long paid vacation. Over the last two months, I've been speaking with my constituents, and I've
heard firsthand how the Trump administration's reckless economic policies and the Republican fueled healthcare crisis are impacting their lives. From higher utility prices to expensive grocery bills to rising health care premiums, working families are
feeling the strain as the cost of living continues to climb. I had hoped that Congress would return ready to address the real issues affecting the American people. Instead, our hearing today
revolves around E-erify, a 20year-old program that we already know does not work. E-ify is an electronic employment eligibility verification system that began as a voluntary pilot program and is now used by only a small percentage
of employers. Nothing stops any employer from voluntarily using a verify. But despite that fact that is has ex existed for decades very few employers use it. Why?
Because it simply does not work. Since 2006, my Republican colleagues have repeatedly tried to mandate its use across the board, but those efforts have all failed because of broad opposition. Widespread use of Eerify is opposed by
small business communities, civil liberty groups, religious organizations, agricultural associations, and growers, privacy advocates, libertarian think tanks, and immigration reform groups. Even some libertarian politicians have
warned that a national e-erify mandate would hand the government the ultimate onoff switch for whether any American is allowed to work. Think about that for a moment. My Republican colleagues claim to be pro business and the party of
small government. And yet they want the federal government to expand a program that would only work with a massive national database that tracks and consolidates private worker information. In practice, EFerify has proven
ineffective and harmful to employers, immigrants, and American workers. This system often generates errors that deny American citizens and legal permanent residents job opportunities that they are fully qualified for. In 2018, a
study by Kato Institute revealed that over 70,000 legal American workers were told by Eerify that they were not authorized to work. If every employer were forced to use E-Verify, experts estimate that those errors would
hit roughly 200,000 legal workers every year with tens of thousands wrongly pushed out of the labor market entirely. Eerify can also facilitate hiring discrimination against job applicants of color, especially those from Latino
backgrounds because employers might unfairly avoid hiring workers who look like they may not pass the system. So, this is the Republican plan, an ineffective system that is harsh on workers and burdensome on employers. And
at a time when the surveillance state only continues to ramp up under President Trump the last thing we need to give the government is another tool to intrude on our constitutional rights and economic freedom. To truly help workers, Congress should focus on
policies that address the real needs such as right rising wages, guaranteeing paid leave, and ensuring access to quality affordable health care. Instead, congressional Republicans are trying to distract us from their own failing
agenda. They are blaming immigrants and driving our communities while they rip away health care and nutrition assistant for millions of Americans and jack up prices with their reckless tariffs in order to pay for massive tax cuts for the rich. At a at a time of real
economic uncertainty, our job should be to protect people's livelihoods and bring cost down. Eerify does nothing to help people pay for their food, their rent, or their child care. It does nothing to protect workers from wage theft, abuse,
or unsafe working conditions. And instead of focusing on a flawed system that would worsen discrimination, complicate life for small businesses, and cause undue stress for job seekers, Congress should use its power to address the real needs of working families.
Despite America's plea for help, Congress has not raised the federal minimum wage in 15 years. We are not focusing on how to expand access to paid leave, child care, or healthcare. in this very subcommittee of workforce protection. We have yet to hold a
hearing this year that actually expands workers protection. These are the things that this Congress and this subcommittee should focus on to create an economy that works for everyone, not just for the wealthy and the well-connected. It is time to get
back to work and deliver on the issues that the American people truly care about. When I'm in my district, small business owners and workers are not asking for us to mandate e-erify. I'm hearing about prices rising, wage
stagnate stagnation, hardworking people unable to find jobs, small businesses struggling under the weight of President Trump's tariffs. If we want to support the workingclass people, we need to address these issues and invest in our workforce, not build
another broken surveillance tool. Thank you, and I yield back. Pursuant to committee rule 8C, all members who wish to insert written statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically in Microsoft Word format
by 5:00 p.m. 14 days after this hearing. And without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous material noted during the hearing to be submitted for the official hearing record. And now to the introduction of witnesses. Our first
witness is Mrs. Jamie Andress, the vice president and chief human resource officer for Cadell Construction in Montgomery, Alabama. Mrs. Andrris is testifying today on behalf of Associated General Contractors of America. To introduce our second witness, I'd like
to recognize the vice chair of the full committee, the representative from Utah, Mr. Owens. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'd like to introduce Chris Gvulis. He's the president of Ivory Development in Salt Lake City, Utah. Uh, is testifying on
behalf of the National Association of Homebuilders. And Utah is a very unique uh, innovative collaborative state. And Chris is going to be a valuable voice today as we continue to have this conversation. So, thank you and I yel back. Thank you. Our third witness is Ms.
Jesse Han, a senior counsel for labor and employment policy at the National Immigration Law Center here in Washington DC. And our final witness is Rosemary, Miss Rosemary Jensen, the co-founder and policy director for the Immigration Accountability Project also
in Washington DC. Thank you to all of you for being here. Uh we look forward to testimony from each of you and pursuant to committee rules I will ask that each of you limit your oral testimony to a threeminut summary of the written testimony which you provided as
committee members may have many questions. The clock will countdown from 3 minutes pursuant to committee rule 8D and committee practice. However, we will not cut you off until you reach the 5minute mark. I would also like to remind the witness to be aware of their responsibility to provide accurate
information to the subcommittee. And with that, I will recognize our first witness today, Ms. Andress, you are recognized for your testimony. Chairman McKenzie, Ranking Member Omar, members of the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, thank you for inviting me
to testify today. My name is Jamie Andress and I serve as vice president, chief HR officer at Cadell Construction, a general contractor based in Montgomery, Alabama. We are proud to work with the federal government to help build a range of civilian and defense installations across the US and overseas. I am testifying on behalf of
the 27,000 members of the Associated General Contractors of America or AGC, the leading association in the construction industry. At Cadell, my responsibilities include ensuring that every member of our domestic construction teams are authorized to work in the US and that we fully comply
with employment and immigration laws. We use E-Verify on every hire for our US projects because we believe that having a legal workforce isn't just our obligation, but it is at the heart of our commitment to fairness, integrity, and our culture. E-Verify has been a useful tool, but it is not perfect. As
Congress considers policy options, I respectfully offer the following. Improve the systems accuracy. Some construction firms report that individuals who pass an Everify check are in fact undocumented workers. Also consider eliminating the requirements
that contractors who complete Everify also complete I9's for those same workers. This places redundant compliance burdens on employers. We urge you to include compliance and technical assistance support for EV5 users, particularly smaller businesses. Many
construction projects include multiple construction firms. For instance, general contractors hire subcontractors who in turn subcontract portions of their work to other firms. Each firm should be individually held accountable for compliance with E-Verify requirements.
Provide notices to employers regarding changes to work authorizations. Construction firms like ours want to be in complete compliance, but few firms have the bandwidth to constantly check to see if there have been any unannounced changes in work status. And finally, we urge consistency. There's a
patchwork of varying state laws that make compliance more complex and costly. A clear, uniform federal standard would serve everyone better. But the biggest problem with E-Verify is that we simply don't have enough qualified workers available for construction firms like
ours to hire and verify. The AGC recently shared that 92% of construction firms are having a difficult time finding enough qualified workers to hire. The federal government spends 80% of its workforce development dollars encouraging workers to pursue a four-year college degree. Yet only 38%
of Americans earn a four-year college degree. That leaves only 1ifth of federal dollars to support nearly 2thirds of the workforce. This funding imbalance is contributing to acute labor shortages within the construction industry, prompting firms either to not
bid on projects, to raise prices, or to delay their construction schedules on projects they are bidding. We strongly support greater investment in domestic workforce development, including expanding access to trade schools, apprenticeships, and skills training. Because those efforts will take time, we
encourage Congress to consider establishing new and expanding existing employmentbased visas that could provide lawful workers while we work to prepare more Americans for permanent high-paying careers in construction. Cadell and the other members of the AGC stand ready to
work with Congress and federal agencies to strengthen our workforce, improve compliance, and ensure that America's infrastructure gets built by a legal, skilled, and reliable workforce. Thank you again for inviting AC to testify before the committee today. I look forward to answering any questions you
may have. Thank you. And I'll now recognize Mr. Gimulus for your testimony. Good morning. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the National Association of Homebuilders on Everify. [clears throat]
To ensure that Ivory Homes only employs individuals authorized to work in the United States and to comply with Utah law, we have used the E-Verify employment verification system since 2010. Ivory Holmes recognizes the important role businesses play in
ensuring a legal workforce. [clears throat] Our human resource team conducts employment verification for all new hires. While not entirely error-free, the system is easy to use and we have only encountered two instances of identity mismatch in the
first few years of using the system. While verify can be a logical starting point for discussion, it is not a substitute for the broader conversation around comprehensive immigration reform. That being said, I believe that certain recommendations will make it as
accessible for small businesses as it is for larger and more well-resourced organizations. Our members are first and foremost small business owners. Indeed, 80% of the members of NHB have 10 or fewer employees.
A few recommendations. First, [clears throat] any legislation must maintain current federal guidance that employers are responsible for verification of the identity and work authorization status of their direct employees. While we do not verify the
employees of subcontractors, we do require our subcontractors to follow Utah law to verify legal work status of their employees. Further, we are prohibited from knowingly using unauthorized subcontract workers as a
means of circumventing the system. Second, any requirement should provide a a very strong safe harbor to ensure that those who use the system in good faith will not be held liable for errors in the system. Third, employers should be able to begin
the air evify process when a worker start when a worker accepts a position rather than be required to wait until after the worker start date. This cannot be understated. We use valuable resources, precious resources, and we
have to do the Everify after an employee accepts a position. Fourth, providing a telephonic option for employers to complete the Everify process is important. The reality is that the new homes in America are built in suburban
and ex-urban locations that lack necessary internet infrastructure. Fifth, if if employers are going to be required to use a federal E-Verify program, they must be assured that there is only one set of rules for compliance. As Congress considers how best to implement comprehensive immigration
reform, we also urge you to pair the discussion with solutions for boo boosting our domestic workforce pipeline. In conclusion, I believe these recommendations can make Everify a system that's accessible to all. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
Thank you. And next, I'll recognize Miss Han for her testimony. Chairman McKenzie, Ranking Member Omar, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Jesse Han. I'm senior counsel for labor and employment policy
at the National Immigration Law Center. NILK has advocated for improvements to the Everify program since its inception as the basic pilot program in 1997. Our position on E-Verify has always been
clear. Expanding this flawed system without comprehensive immigration reform and strong worker protections will harm workers, employers, and the economy. Today, I want to focus on three critical points that underscore why a nationwide
mandate would be a disaster. First, E-Verify is not ready for the millions of small businesses that would be forced to enroll under a national mandate. Only 13% of US employers currently use E-Verify despite its
availability for more than two decades. That means 87% of employers, most of whom are small businesses, do not participate. And even in the states that have decided to require E-Verify, compliance is low. Fewer than half of
the employers who are required to enroll have enrolled in those states. A recent GAO study of the federal contractors required to enroll found that only 15% had done so. This is in the states and the cont the businesses that are
required to participate in E-Verify already. And why are they resisting? Because E-Verify is costly and it's cumbersome. Large employers with HR departments can absorb the burden, but small businesses cannot. They face complex verification processes,
mismatches that delay hiring and compliance costs that they are ill equipped to manage. Forcing millions of small employers into this system without addressing these challenges will create both a massive compliance problem as
well as dis disproportionately harm small businesses. Second, E-Verify does not shield employers from ICE raids or other enforcement actions. There is no safe harbor for participating in Everify. ICE raids have devastated
companies that have used E-Verify for years, even in states where it's mandatory. Poultry companies in Mississippi, meat packing facilities in Ohio and Nebraska have all faced raids and mass detentions despite
participating in E-Verify. Why? Because E-Verify cannot detect identity theft or confirm that the documents belong to the person who is presenting them. So employers who do everything right still remain exposed to audits, raids, and the reputational
harm. If the system cannot fulfill its core purpose of accurately verifying work authorization, then what is the point of mandating it? Finally, even the Trump administration has admitted that E-Verify is unreliable.
They promote it as a cornerstone of immigration enforcement. But at the same time, DHS has acknowledged that the system is susceptible to identity fraud and lacks of photo matching capabilities in many states. The White House itself
even criticized a main police department this summer as reckless for relying on E-Verify to check the work authorization of a recent hire. At the same time, the government is ramping up I-9 audits and work site raids, creating a compliance
paradox for employers. Employers are told to use E-Verify, but they're warned it won't protect them. This double bind forces businesses, especially small businesses, into an untenable position where even those who are trying to comply with the law cannot get a
reliable answer from the government's own verification system. In short, E-Verify is not ready for a nationwide mandate. It's inaccurate. It's vulnerable to fraud, and it's not even enforced where it's currently required. So, expanding it to millions
of small businesses will destabilize labor markets, push workers off payroll and into the informal economy, and expose employers to greater risks. Congress should reject any mandate until
E-Verify is reformed and paired with strong worker protections and a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers. Anything less will create a crisis that harms workers, employers, and the economy. Thank you, and I look forward
to your questions. And our last testifier is Ms. Jens and I recognize you now for your testimony. Chairman McKenzie, Chairman Wahlberg, Ranking Member Omar, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today
about E-Verify. Everify is a critical tool for deterring illegal immigration to the United States. The vast majority of illegal aliens are coming here for economic opportunity. In other words, jobs. Prospective illegal aliens make a
rational costbenefit analysis. If they believe that the economic benefits of entering illegally outweigh the risks of the journey and of being apprehended and returned home, they come. If they know they will not be able to obtain work here, many will not come.
Removing the benefit of easily obtainable jobs significantly shifts the calculation. In addition to deterring illegal immigration, E-Verify is a necessary tool to prevent the exploitation of illegal labor by international smuggling
cartels and unscrupulous employers. The cartels make billions of dollars smuggling people into the United States based on the promise of jobs here. Once they arrive, often in debt to the cartels, illegal aliens are vulnerable
to unscrupulous employers. Everify is essential not only to deter illegal immigration, but also to provide goodfaith employers with a cheap and effective way to verify that the documents submitted by new hires are valid. With the proliferation of
fraudulent documents, E-Verify removes the burden on employers to be document fraud experts so long as the documents submitted by new hire hires are reasonably valid on their face. In the absence e of Everify, employers find
themselves in a bind. If they accept documents that turn out to be fraudulent, they can be held liable for employing unauthorized aliens. But if they request additional documents, they can be sued by the employee for civil rights violations. E-Verify eliminates
that problem by allowing employers to submit the information on the documents for verification by the government and then to rely on that verification. However, voluntary use of E-Verify may create an uneven playing field for some
businesses. A business owner who wanting to obey the law participates in E-Verify may have to pay a premium to recruit legal workers. his competitor who doesn't participate in E-Verify and doesn't mind violating the law to hire
illegal workers will be able to undercut the law-abiding employer by paying reduced wages and cutting corners on benefits and safety compliance. Abiding by the law should not be a competitive disadvantage. Is the Everify system perfect? No. It is
still possible for illegal aliens to gain the system by using the identity of an American system. American citizen or authorized alien worker. This problem would be alleviated by requiring states to share driver's license photos with E-Verify. During the first half of 2025,
more than 21 million new hires were run through the Everify system. 97.8% of those cases were confirmed virtually instantly. In order to become a truly effective deterrent to illegal immigration, E-Verify should be made
mandatory for all employers in the United States. Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions. Thank you. And under committee rule nine, we will now ask questions of the witnesses under the five-minute rule. And I will recognize myself first. Uh
the first question I have is for Ms. Andress. Uh, your written testimony notes that your company has been using E-Verify for nearly two decades, processing thousands of new hires, and you found the program to be generally reliable and efficient. In addition to complying with the law as a federal
contractor, what do you see as the additional benefits of using E-Verify? Thank you for the question. Uh we certainly see the additional benefits being that we have the ability to maintain a qualified and verified workforce. Uh it's a huge commitment of
ours to not just our employees but also our clients to be able to have uh stable workforce to be able to meet their uh their project schedule to deliver on what it is that we say. And it creates uh a lot of trust among our construction team members as well there. It provides
a lot of um it just really aligns with our commitment to ethical hiring and provides a consistent approach as we grow our workforce. Fantastic. Thank you. Uh Ms. Jensen, in your written testimony, you discussed the prohibition on employers knowingly
hiring unauthorized workers and their obligation to examine employment authorization and identification documents for new hires. However, you point out a flaw in this system. It's challenging for employers on their own to confirm the validity of those
documents. Could you elaborate on how E-Verify provides a solution for those employers? If you can microphone, please. Thank you. I did it. Um, what happens is that the fraudulent documents have increasingly
become better and better over the last few decades. Uh, we know that there's a massive industry in fraudulent documents in this country. a lot of it generated by the cartels. Um, and so the better the documents get, the harder it is for
any average person to identify those documents as real or fraudulent. So I mean there we have people in law enforcement who have studied fake documents for decades and may still have trouble identifying a good fraudulent
document. So an employer shouldn't be expected to do that. Um, you know, we have the I-9 system. That was the the initial version of, well, we don't want you to hire illegal aliens because we know that that undercuts American workers and their wages and it also
leads to exploitation. Um, but we recognize now that a a paper system in the I-9 form is not sufficient because that means that the employer has to be able to recognize this document that
this new hire just handed over is fake and and that's just not a reasonable expectation. So, by allowing the employer to type in the information into the E-Verify system on those documents and get an almost instantaneous answer
in 97.8% of cases um that the employer can rely on and by that I mean that the employer who relies on that information is not going to be prosecuted. It does not mean that the worker if the worker turns out to be illegal that worker will
still be deported. So the employer will lose that worker, but the employer will not be criminally prosecuted for knowingly hiring an illegal alien. So with that growing challenge of false and stolen identities that are being
used to circumvent verify, in your view, what policy changes should we make to close those gaps? The most important policy change at the moment is to require states to share the driver's license photos. Um, E-Verify already has a partnership with the Enlet
system that allows for E-Verify to verify the authenticity of a driver's license in I believe it's 44 states and jurisdictions. Uh, there are 10 states that do not share that even that information. But the additional step
that's needed is to share the photo because the only way that we're going to get at stolen identities. And remember, for every stolen identity, there's an American or legal resident who's been victimized by that. So to get at that, we need for the employer to be able to
compare the person standing in front of them, the person on the document that they provide, and then the person on the document as it was issued by the state. So that three-way comparison is what is critical to getting rid of that last
part of the problem with E-Verify, which is stolen identities. All right, thank you for that. My time is about to expire, so I'm going to recognize next the ranking member, uh, Miss Omar from Minnesota.
Thank you, chairman. Um, Miss Han, uh, thank you so much for, uh, joining us today. In your written testimony, you outline, you outline several reasons why the E-Verify uh, does not work the way that committee Republicans claim it does. Could you walk us through the most
significant problems with E-Verifi's effectiveness? And what do you know about the systems error rates and the number of work authorized people who are wrongfully flagged or rejected from employment each year?
Yes, thank you for the question. So, um, mandating E-Verify nationwide would be of mistake because the system is not ready for the millions of small businesses that are not currently enrolled. Part of what we know about who is enrolled, that 13% of employers who
are enrolled is that they tend to be much larger employers. So, they tend to have HR departments and more infrastructure and capability to handle compliance requirements. um unlike uh the smaller businesses that
by and large are not enrolled um and do not have that type of in-house assistance to handle the burdens. So um that means that they need to do things like technology upgrades and staff trainings and they'll be facing different types of operational
challenges in order to uh get to a point of compliance. And on a nationwide level, um, people who have researched that have estimated that it would cost, uh, those employers collectively billions of dollars to do that, to reach
that. Um, even for businesses that do comply, um, those companies, as we have discussed, already face raids and audits, it doesn't stop that from happening. Um and
uh despite championing the system, the administration is unable to um kind of give employers any real protection against the reliability of the unreliability of the data. So what we we
don't have good current data on the reliability of the system. And I think one thing that the committee could focus on is getting a more current study on the error rates because the last time an independent external evaluation was
conducted was in 2009. That's a very long time ago. But if you take the um error rates that they found at that time and you apply them to our current uh employment numbers, our national um
folks participating in the workforce in the labor force. Um, we think that anywhere between roughly 200,000 and 520,000 people each year who are work authorized
and have been hired and accepted an offer of employment would be wrongfully denied because of the errors in E-Verify the opportunity to start that job. And I know that proponents of the system will
talk about, you know, it's got a 97 98% effective rate. The fact is that in your jurisdiction, if you have people coming to you because you um were denied the ability to start a job that you had been
offered and you have work authorization, um that is still not going to be an acceptable number of 97%. Um, Miss Han, do you think the federal government should create this kind of national database for workers? Um, and
what does the why does this idea give you a pause? Yeah. So, I think in order for E-Verify to function properly, it would require a massive consolidation of data that does not currently exist, right? Um, we would
need state agencies, uh, and federal agencies. Um, we would need the photo databases. And, um, and then in addition, what we haven't even talked about yet is the flaws in the SSA database and how those affect people in
this system as well, right? Um the the Numadent database which is the name of the database at SSA um has errors in roughly 17.8 million of its records. And um including things like outdated
citizenship status for foreignb born workers and lawful immigrants. And so this is the reason why there's a higher error rate and disproportionate harm to people who are naturalized citizens or who are work authorized immigrants. Um and so in order to correct all of those
things, you would have to consolidate um across federal and state systems a massive amount of personal data. And then it would need to be continuously updated and you would have to link the identity information across the country.
And that process is not only impractical but it would effectively create a centralized national ID infrastructure um that tracks every worker in America. Um and that raises some serious privacy
concerns and um beyond the risk of hacking I think it also would expand uh the government's it would enable the government to conduct surveillance far beyond employment verification
um eroding civil liberties and creating a tool to monitor individuals in a way that it was never intended. Thank you. Thank you. Uh next we'll go to our esteemed chairman of the full committee, Mr. Wahlberg from Michigan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for uh
holding this hearing. Important subjects. Miss Andress, uh thank you for being here. Um this committee, as you know, has jurisdiction over workforce issues and certainly over training issues. We're uh keenly interested in
seeing employees uh have their skills enhanced and the opportunity for a fulfilling life. You mentioned in your uh your written statement that construction wages are 19% higher which
is significant uh than the average for all private sector wages. Uh however as we know um many of your construction jobs aren't filled for lack of employees to be there. So what recommendations do you have to increase the number of
qualified workers keying in unqualified workers who could fill these good paying jobs? Thank you so much for the question. There are multi- steps that should be taken to help grow the workforce in general but specifically for the
construction industry. uh expansion of workforce development programs starting as early as primary or elementary levels so that children and their support systems have access to um not just that construction is a career but it is a
desirable one that creates legacy and provides for families and um is something that really you can be a part of something much larger. It is not what people typically think that the industry is. So those workforce development programs, vocational trainings, uh
available to uh high school students, increasing support for trade schools, allowing them to take on more students uh at an earlier uh at an earlier age as well would be supremely helpful. Um continuing to partner between schools,
community colleges, four-year programs, uh and providing that practical aspect to what it is that construction brings and what that industry is. supporting apprenticeships, uh, mentorships, on the job trainings. All of those things are incredibly helpful to allowing
individuals who don't know much about construction but would be a great fit for the industry to be able to explore their own skills and their own strengths and be able to bring that into the industry. Um, one of the things that we have done specifically along with a
number of the firms within AGC is a really uh renewed investment into internship programs. uh and that can certainly come from four-year degree students who have it as a requirement possibly of their program or just something that they want to have the practical training to go along with what
it is that they are learning in a classroom. Um but that increase in internships is really uh a key part of what I know is helping us internally develop our workforce and other firms are seeing that as well. So support and policies uh that just promote
recognition, that promote the desiraability, that talk about the um just the practical aspects that it is a highpaying career. Um and there's a lot of movement that individuals can have within the industry would be supremely helpful.
Appreciate that. And uh it's another reason why we're very very pleased that finally we got workforce pel short-term PEL into the one big beautiful bill which we'd like to expand as well. Uh, thank you. Uh, Mr. Gamrulas, uh, your
written testimony says that most homebuilders do not use E-Verify. What could the program do to make it easier for homebuilders to use E-Verify? Thank you for the question, uh, Mr. Chair. Um,
one, it would be to, uh, continue to make it very accessible. Um, I noted in my testimony that um, 80% of the members of the National Association of Homebuilders have 10 or fewer employees. Um, to a large degree, they just don't
even know that it exists. These are sole proprietors. They're general contractors. Um, they're they're mom and pop operators. And that is true for both the homebuilders and the subcontractors that build our homes. Um and uh one of
the then I think that that's one of the reasons why um most of the members of NHB don't use it is because they just don't even know that it's there. And I do think that if it were to be expanded, um there would be two things. One, an education campaign, but also a phasein
program um where you would start with the largest employers and work it back um and phase it into the to the the smaller operators. Okay. Thank you. Uh, Miss Jensen, I assume that uh having a safe harbor for
employers would benefit the use of EV verify. You you would agree, I'm sure. Absolutely. And uh um I have so many other questions, but I think what you your point you made in your your testimony
was that while there are problems, yet the benefits of having this as a tool will work well. So, my time has expired. I don't want to run the risk of using the good benefits of the of the chairman, so I yield back.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Next, we'll go to our friend from the minority, the ranking member, Mr. Scott from Virginia. Thank you, M. [clears throat] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Miss Andress, uh, excuse me, you indicated you had many recommendations to improve the Everify
system. uh does your organization support it if those recommendations are not uh achieved? Do you mind repeating the question? Does your organization support mandating everify if though if we don't follow
those recommendations and fix it first? The system as it is is something that we support and recommendations to increase the accuracy and the efficacy of it would be something that the AGC would support. Well, would you recommend
mandating it for everybody if those recommend if we don't follow those recommendations? If we don't fix it first, you would you still support um the mandate. [laughter] Well, yes. You don't you we're not you're not
under subpoena. You don't have to answer. Um Mr. Gabulis, um you you indicated that small businesses aren't ready for this. What do they do now? Uh thank you for the question. Uh by and large, they don't actually use it. Um it
has been the law in the state of Utah since 2010. Um the threshold uh for uh businesses initially was uh 15 or more employees. That threshold was increased in 2022 to 150 employees. And so by and
large in the state of Utah um most small businesses, which the home home builders and subcontractors are by and large small businesses, are actually not using it. That being said, they are still prohibited by law from knowingly using
undocumented workers. So, how do they verify whether people are documented or not? Um, I don't know. Okay. Um,
Miss Jinx, if people if you have a very um strong system, did you suggest that people might be working as they say off the books. It is entirely possible that some
employers would still hire illegal aliens off the books certainly, but if there's a mandate a mandate for Everify, that becomes much easier for law enforcement to target to target under working under the books. Exactly.
Okay. Um, Miss Han, can you say something about what happened in Arizona? Yes. Um, so Arizona was one of the first states to enact a statewide E-Verify mandate. And, um, what we saw is that
after five years of that law going into effect, only a third of, uh, employers had started to use it. But more broadly, the issue is that it pushes workers off
of payrolls and into the informal economy. And then that has knock-on effects, right? Because it's not just that the that they're no longer on the payroll, it's that the taxes aren't being paid on those payrolls. And so
specifically what they found in Arizona that was so interesting was that um they documented that the um state income tax collection had dropped by 13%.
But the sales tax collection only fell by 2.5%. And so what that indicated to the researchers was that the workers were still there and they were still working and spending money, but they were no
longer paying income taxes. Um, Miss [clears throat] Han, do we know what the error rate is on E-Verify? We have 2009 data on the error rate. um it is I think not the current error rate
but we don't have publicly available current data on the error rate um at the time what um the 2009 data said that um
the overall error rate for what are called tenative non-confirmations which is the initial check that the system um conducts were.3%. It sounds low until you start thinking about that's
200,000 people in the country. I mean that that means false positives. Those are people who yes are well people mean different things by false positives. So just to be clear those are people who are authorized to work and
the system is saying they are not 3%. Yes. Okay. Does anybody have different numbers? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Next, we'll go to Mr. Fine from Florida. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and and I want to start by saying I think illegal
immigrants are a scourge in this country. I'm going to walk through why before I get to my questions because I think what we heard a lot of misstatements here about um correlation leading to causation. Number one, illegal immigrants undercut American wages. They do by definition because
they cannot work on the books. And so after as a result they have to work off the books. And so that is true that taxes are not being paid, benefits are not being provided. And that unlike what Miss Han said, that is what leads to
more legal workers working off the books because in order to be competitive in the job market, companies begin to hire legal workers off the books in order to have them in addition to their illegal workers. That's what I've heard from my constituents who are in the construction
business back home. They say, "How can I possibly compete for contracts following the rules when I have to compete with those who do not?" So, number one, illegal immigrants undercut the wages of American workers. Number two, they don't pay taxes. Again, they are off the
books. And then number three, they cost a fortune. When an illegal immigrant goes to the hospital, we pay for it because they can't have health insurance. When an illegal immigrant sends their child to school, we pay for it because they're not paying those taxes. And when an illegal immigrant
drives a car, for example, in the in my state of Florida, and they cause an accident, that causes expenses to Americans who have higher auto insurance rates because they effectively have to pay for the insurance of those illegals. Um, I have a view that we should deport
every single illegal immigrant in order to solve these problems. And I I am always amazed by the fetishization that I hear on the other side towards these folks. The fact that people are not using E-Verify means that we need to push them to use it more and we need to increase the penalties to do it because
that is what will increase the situation. If we want people to be trained so that they can take the jobs that illegal immigrants are taking, we need wages to go up. We need to stop competing with illegal immigrants. I don't disagree that in many industries are reliant on illegal immigrant labor
today. We need to fix that by sending the illegal immigrants home. So, I have a question for Miss Jen. This hearing is about Everify, but I I want to take a step back. This didn't just come out of the blue. It was done for a reason. Why did Congress find it necessary to create
an Everify system? Why did they think it was important? Did they just sort of wake up one day? Why did they think it was necessary to require employers to only knowingly hire authorized workers and then to impose sanctions on employers who fail to comply? What led them to do this?
So the uh it was first made illegal to hire an unauthorized worker in the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. Uh it had been talked about by various commissions and members of Congress and so on for years and years prior to that,
but they actually did it in 1986 and created the I-9 form, the paper system for employers to try to uh you know show that they were only hiring legal workers. The result of that was a massive industry in fraudulent
documents. And so as a result of that industry and fraudulent documents and specifically a recommendation by Barbara Jordan, the chairwoman of the uh commission on immigration reform created by the 1990 immigration act um Congress
Lamar Smith actually who was the chairman of the uh immigration subcommittee of the judiciary committee at the time. And by the way, today is his birthday so it's very fitting that we're having this hearing today and he'll kill me if he hears me say that. Um but so he added this the basic pilot
program, this verification system that became E-Verify into the 1996 illegal immigration reform and immigrant responsibility act. Um and it has evolved since that initial pilot program which was very strictly limited to
certain employers in five states and then went nationwide in 2005. And by the way, as a small business, our our company employs five full-time workers. We use E-Verify. And I can tell you that it works in that the very first person I
put through the system, I actually hired from ICE and didn't expect a tenative non-confirmation for and got one and went to her with the the letter that it told me to print out to hand to her and she said, "Oh yeah, I forgot to change my name with the Social Security Administration." She went over lunch and
did that at the Social Security Administration in Washington DC, came back, you know, still from her lunch break and it was fixed. I ran her again in Perfect. Well, thank you. Look, this is a scourge. We need to be using E-Verify more because we need to deport every
single illegal immigrant in this country. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. All right. Next, we're going to go to Mr. Mesmer from Indiana. Uh, thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today. Uh, Miss Andress and
Mr. Gamrulus, my home state, Indiana, requires state agencies, local governments, and state contractors to use Everify, which not not only ensures their workforce is authorized, but sets an example that employers should hire legal workers. Could you could you discuss the legal requirements for your
companies to use Everify? And would you say that meeting those requirements to participate in E-Verify is straightforward? I guess I'll start. Thank you for the question. Um, yes, it is straightforward to answer the second part of what you said. The legal requirements are that
we're a federal contractor and so we are required to use E-Verify. Uh, and for consistency across all of our hiring practices, uh, we do it for all of our hires across the US. Thank you for the question. Uh, I would concur with that. We have found that it
is uh straightforward, fairly easy to use, and as I mentioned in my comments, in 15 years, we've only had two tenative non-confirmations. So, identity mismatches um out of the literally hundreds of people that we have hired as direct as
direct employees. Thank you. Uh Miss Jensen, the E-Verify program helps employers ensure they're hiring authorized lawful workers. How does Eer E-Verify also benefit American workers who should not have to compete for compete for jobs with unauthorized workers?
Yeah, that is it's absolutely critical for protecting American workers because we know that the law of supply and demand applies to the economy. You know, if you flood the labor force with workers, whether they're low-skilled, high-skilled, mediumkilled, whatever,
you're going to reduce wages. So when we have flooded the labor force with illegal aliens, we have reduced wages for American workers. They have to compete with people who understandably are willing to work for less, willing to
take fewer benefits, willing to cut corners on safety, compliance, and all of that. American workers should not have to compete against illegal aliens. Thank you. Um there's been several articles about workers using fraudulent documents that E-Verify didn't catch.
How could E-Verify be improved to reduce the fraud? Yeah, that's it's an important improvement that is needed and that is again to share for the states to share driver's license photos with Everify. And I want to point out there is no E-Verify database. There is not an
Everify database. E-Verify is an internet system that pings DHS databases and social security databases. There is no, you know, centralized database for all the workers in the United States. And sharing state driver's license
photos would not change that. So, we're not talking about national ID card or registry or anything like that. This is a a system that pings existing databases. Okay. Thank you. And also uh last Congress, the House Republicans passed the Border Act of 2023, Secure Board Act
of 2023 to fix some of the glaring issues facing our immigration system today. Um how would you recommend if we implemented E-Verify on a national scale? Um how would you recommend we roll it out and what would you say are the most important features to keep? I think that the legislation that was
the E-Verify legislation that was included in the Secure the Border Act is the right legislation. It has been carefully crafted. It was actually negotiated with the business community specifically to provide the you know
single federal system so they don't have to navigate 50 different state laws on E-Verify. Um it is it's a roll out based on the size of the company. Um, it is the most straightforward, most employer
friendly and most American worker friendly version of of mandatory E-Verify and it should be enacted. It was voted on by the House as you said last Congress. It should be voted on again. Okay. Thank you. Uh, thank you for your responses and I yield back the rest of my time.
Thank you. Next, we'll go to Mr. Tano from California. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm just curious, Miss Andres, do you believe that there's a labor shortage uh in this country or do we have enough workers or do we have too many workers? I think there's an acute labor shortage
specifically within the construction industry. I'm a little confused by Mrs. Mrs. Jensen's testimony that, you know, wages are being driven down uh by undocumented workers um in the context of a labor shortage. So, I'm Yeah, but anyway, but
I I want to go to Miss Han. Miss Han, uh, one study for the KO Institute estimates that E-Verify failed to stop nearly 12 million unauthorized workers from being hired uh, between since 2006 and 2019 while only stopping 3 million.
That's a 20% success rate. Can you tell me why E-Verify is so bad at accomplishing its core mission, its core purpose? what is happening under the hood that explains such a poor success rate? Thank you for the question. Um, so yes,
it's true. The KO study, um, in 2019, uh, found that between 2006 and 2019, uh, they blocked 3 million unauthorized hires and allowed 12 million through. So
as a starting point that's showing that the system is failing on its own terms on its own stated intent. Uh it is designed to prevent illegal employment but they confirmed 86% of unauthorized
hires just in the year 2018 alone. Um and the effectiveness has declined as workers have learned how to bypass the system using borrowed identities. So despite billions in compliance costs and
the political emphasis on enforcement, the program really hasn't put a dent in unauthorized employment. Um it has imposed burdens on employers um as well as the lawful workers who face these
erroneous uh non-confirmations. And um one thing I will just add is that if you look at the data in the states where E-Verify mandates have been enacted um the population of undocumented
immigrants in those states does not decline uh in large by large you know by and large in the time after those um those state laws are enacted. And so again, it's it's
what E-Verify does is it drives people off the books. It does not um just off the books. And if we were to do a national mandate, uh we can assume that it's not going to necessarily have an impact on if we follow what the state you're suggesting that the state data uh
would point to uh a federal mandate not being a solution to reducing amount of un people off the books. Okay. in June. Immigration, by the way, is Kato is Kato a crazy liberal uh radical. Uh there are a number of issues on which
the National Immigration Law Center and Kato have very different views. Um this is one issue where we do actually share. All right. So we can see that Kato was, you know, has no there's not a sense that they would put out flawed data uh
or uh ideologically uh motivated uh information on this particular issue. Uh in June, immigration authorities uh raided a meatacking plant in Omaha, Nebraska for hiring undocumented workers despite the
employer using E-Verify. And when the president of the plant said as much as to the immigration official officers during the raid, they the immigration officials told the plant manager that E-Verify the E-Verify system is quote
unquote broken. In August, a police department in Maine was caught hiring an undocumented worker for its police force despite using E-Verify. In response, the Trump administration's own spokesman for the DHS called the usage of E-Verify
quote unquote reckless, saying, quote, "It uh the Orchard Beach Police Department's reckless reliance on E-Verify violates federal law and does not absolve them of their failure to conduct basic background checks to verify legal status." End quote.
My views on the brutality and incompetence of the Department of Homeland Security's tactic aside, it seems that even the Trump administration acknowledges the inaccuracy of the EVFY system. Miss Han, why has DHS all of a
sudden come out against E-Verify? That's a good question. I don't know. Uh it doesn't make sense to me that they could be on the one hand telling everyone that this is the system that they want employers to enroll in. They
have a program called Image that E-Verify is part of and they're trying to encourage employers to voluntarily enroll through that program. And yet at the same time um you know the incident
in Orchard, Old Orchard Beach, Maine, this is a small beach town in Maine that hires seasonal uh police officers in the summer because they have an influx of people to the beach. and um the
town manager and the head of the police department went on national news and said, "This is the system that we have been offered. If there is another system that we should be aware of that you would like us to use, please tell us what it is." They uh
we're gonna complied with the law. Time has expired, so we'll go to our next questioner, Mr. Rothman from Wisconsin. Thank you. Um, I'll talk to uh Mr. Rambalis. Um, I used to be in the state
legislature and there's certain lobbyists you wind up getting used to showing up in your office and I got to know the the lobbyist for the local carpenters union very well. And again and again he'd come into the office and
scream about we had to do more about all these carpenters who um got a um employer ID number and were working and undercutting the local carpenters. Okay. So this was
a routine theme of the Democrat party. We gota, you know, we got to be out here. We got to be more aggressive. uh we got to get rid of these 1099s in which they're driving down wages. Why and when did the Democrat party go from
saying that above all we could not have above all we had to prevent these people coming in this country and working and undercutting uh American labor. and today when it seems to be they want more
and more people in this country. Could you could you speculate on what happened in the interim there? I I I cannot I I appreciate that. Um neither our company or the NHB uh wants to speculate on when when that happened
um with the uh with the Democrat party. I what I can speak to is the um experience that we have had and the interest of the National Association of Homebuilders um to have a legal workforce.
Okay. Uh Miss Andrew, do you have a comment on how that could have happened? How I mean we we've gone from aund 180 degree turn here in which all of a sudden the Democrats are doing all they can to drive down the cost of labor. I too have no comment on that. Miss
Jinx, we'll miss on. We'll go with Miss on. We'll say how what happened. What happened between when I was in the state legislature 15 years ago and like the number one goal of the Democrats and the carpenters union was to make sure we
didn't have all these illegals running around or immigrants running around. And today, when it seems to be a goal is to get more more immigrants as possible. I'm sorry I can't comment on behalf of the Carpenters Union or the Democratic
Party. Okay, Miss Jensen. Yeah, I would be happy to comment. Um the biggest shift that we have seen is that the unions in general, not any specific union, but the unions in
general decided that protecting American workers was no longer the goal because getting membership dues was more important. And so to increase membership dues, including from illegal aliens and uh other immigrant workers or
non-immigrant workers, um they would change their position. I mean, the the unions used to be the strongest advocates against amnesty and against illegal immigration and that flipped. Okay. Well, hopefully somebody will step
forward and look out for the average guy. Oh, he already did. um guy by the name the the the guy by the name I'm I'm trying to help out right now. Mark Riyle was the lobbyist back for the Wisconsin Carpenters. Um I'll ask you give you a
question. One of the reasons housing costs today are through the roof is we don't have enough people who are electricians or plumbers or what have you. Can you give us any ideas as to how I mean I'm afraid the
cost of a house will continue to be high because we don't have people even in the pip pipeline. We should have seen it coming because 10 years ago seemed like all the plumbers and electricians were 60 years old. So we should have seen this coming. But I think uh schools were giving young kids very bad information.
But can you think of any way we can kind of quickly get more qualified construction workers in the workforce? Yes. Um as has been stated uh strong domestic um and foreignb born workers uh
and and skilled training um I take you to a one of our job sites and you will see a lot of very skilled labor and it's estimated as much as 30% of the workforce on home building sites in the US are foreignb born workers. Um, we we
need to really quick, I'll ask you because I'm running out of time. Uh, what is a plumber or carpenter with five years experience, what are they what can you expect that they'll make today? Oh, they'll make uh just under six figures if they've got five years of experience.
Just under six years for for a carpenter. That's correct. And for a plumber, probably more. Huh. This the skilled labor for sure. Yeah. Well, I hope we have a lot of young people listening so they don't make the mistake of going to college. Thank you.
Thank you. And with that, our members have concluded questioning. I want to thank all of our testifiers here today. Can I finish my last question? Time has expired, but we we will certainly welcome any comments for the record. Uh so if you would like to submit those, uh we we will make sure
that those get into the record. Uh and with that, we're going to head to closing remarks. I'd like to recognize our ranking member for her closing statement. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you again uh to our witnesses for speaking with us today. Over the past two months,
while Republicans shut [clears throat] down the government, working families have been feeling the stain of a slowing job market, higher prices for food, gas, and unaffordable health care. Instead of returning to Congress to address the economic issues facing the American
American people, we wasted this morning discussing an outdated and ineffective program that does nothing to lower everyday cost, improve job quality, or make workplaces safer and fairer. Eerify would pile more paperwork and liability
on to small businesses, exasperate hiring discrimination, and deny qualified American job opportunities due to system errors. No one stopping businesses from choosing to use e-erify. But most do not bother with it because
of its rampant problems. Working families and small businesses are not asking for e-erify. They are asking for higher wages, paid leave, access to quality, affordable health care and child care. It is our duty to step up
and deliver effective solutions to these problems on behalf of our constituents and build an economy that works for everyone. With that, thank you and I yield back the rest of my time. Thank you. And again, I'd like to thank all of our witnesses for testifying in
today's hearing. The topic of E-Verify is a very important one for America's workforce. And after four years of massive inflation during the Biden administration that absolutely crushed working families, I can't think of a better topic to focus on than figuring
out how we can raise American wages. And what we see with the exploitation of illegal immigrants who are unauthorized to work in this country is that they are being taken advantage of, being paid under the table, being paid substandard wages. That is wage theft. That's what
something we should be focusing on on this committee. Wage theft of any employee, any worker in this country who is authorized to be here. That's something we should focus on. And then when it comes to all of the American workers who are out there again after
being crushed with higher prices and massive inflation for four years during the Biden administration, we want to figure out how to raise American wages. And the way that we can do that is by focusing on things like E-Verify. So this this testimony today was very
informative. We've heard about the ways that we can actually improve the system. One thing that came up during minority questioning was that 3 million illegal immigrants were blocked from getting hired. That is a fantastic thing. That is incredible that we stopped 3 million
people from being unauthorized to work in this country, stealing American wages, taking American jobs. That's great. That is a good thing that this system did and we should be thankful for the fact that that occurred. But the problem exists that 12 million illegal immigrants were taking American wages
and American jobs. So we should be figuring out solutions to that problem. How do we address that? But the minority wants to again be in the 20% minority. This is an 8020 issue. People will support American workers, American wage increases every single day against
illegal immigrant labor that is stealing from them. They are stealing American wages, stealing American jobs, stealing taxpayer money. And the Democrats want to do nothing about that. That's what we heard today. So we have an obligation to stand up for the American worker and
this workforce protection subcommittee does that responsibility at every single hearing. We take it very seriously and E-Verify is something we should expand upon as we move forward. So, we are going to continue to stand with American workers as we move forward, continue to increase American wages, and I want to
thank all of you patriots for being here today, testifying uh on behalf of your employees and the American workers uh who rely on all of us uh to get these things right to protect them and their jobs every single day. So, with that, I'll conclude and I want to say thank you again and enjoy the rest of your
day. With that, this subcommittee is closed and uh we are adjourned.