[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E501-E502]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

INTRODUCTION OF THE EMPLOYMENT ENHANCEMENT REFORM ACT

______

HON. WILLIAM H. ZELIFF, JR.

of new hampshire

in the house of representatives

Thursday, March 2, 1995
Mr. ZELIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my colleague John Kasich
and 25 of our colleagues to introduce legislation to improve Federal
job training.
The present job training situation is a boondoggle of Federal
bureaucracy. Hundreds of programs with different rules and
administrative structures confuse the people they are intended to help
and waste taxpayer money. Currently, States bear the brunt of the
conflicting rules, regulations, and definitions from this senseless
bureaucracy, and it is there that we must address the reform.
The Employment Enhancement Reform Act will simplify and streamline
the flow of Federal job-training dollars to the States to better serve
unemployed Americans and hasten their reentry into the work force. The
act consolidates over 90 Federal job training programs into one
flexible block grant program.
This discretionary block grant will be distributed to the States by
formula at the direction of the Secretary of Labor using the formula
from the Joint Training Partnership Act. States will have one set of
job training definitions and regulations to implement, and one funding
stream to monitor. The result: more resources
devoted to job training services and fewer dollars being wasted on
administrative costs.

My bill will make the broken Federal job training program cheaper,
more effective, more efficient, and more flexible. Today each of these
90 programs have different rules, regulations, and definitions. A youth
can be any age from 14 to 30. On-the-job training participants have
different eligibility rules and reimbursement rates depending on
individual programs. This causes chaos for participants,
administrators, and auditors.
Instead of hundreds of program regulations, States will have one set
of job training definitions and regulations to implement, and one
funding stream to monitor. They will have one State-established set of
standards and definitions for program success rather than the multitude
we have today. The responsibility for financial and programmatic audits
will lie with State Governors. Federal philosophies and biases will no
longer be mandated over State management of these programs. States will
be responsible for demonstrating that funds are being spent effectively
and efficiently to implement the goals.
Consolidating the programs will create a pool of funds totaling
approximately $11 billion. From this pool: $7.6 billion--70 percent--
would go to the States through formula grants; $539 million--5
percent--would be distributed
[[Page E502]] by the Secretary to States containing populations of a
national, rather than a State concern; $2.7 billion--25 percent--would
go to deficit reduction.
Our legislation assures that States have the flexibility to target
job-training funds where they are most needed. States will work in
partnership with private industry to provide training that supports the
labor markets that exist in that State--rather than be subject to
nationwide labor markets and fund distributions that have nothing to do
with their State.
This act also repeals the 0.2 percent FUTA [Federal Unemployment Tax]
surtax, adopted in 1976 and intended to be temporary. This repeal
demonstrates to businesses that some Members of Congress are conscious
of the mandates imposed by the Federal Government. This provision also
takes another small step toward reducing the cost of regulation to
business and encourages job growth.
The benefit to the Federal Government of a single, more efficient job
training effort is a reduction in the deficit by approximately $7
billion over 5 years.
The end result, Mr. Speaker, will be a program driven by results.
More resources can be devoted directly to effective job-training
services that put people back to work, and fewer dollars will be wasted
on administrative costs
These reforms are necessary to give Americans the skills our economy
needs to grow and to get our welfare recipients back to work and back
into the economy. State Governors are eager to develop partnerships
with private industry and build successful programs. This legislation
will make our job-training dollars work better and put people back to
work. I urge my colleagues to join us in this effort.
I enclose a summary of my legislation.
Employment Enhancement Reform Act

The States shall use the money appropriated to the State's
discretion with the following requirements:

populations

The states will continue to serve the populations that were
previously served by the consolidated programs and those that
will benefit from the services. Those populations are:
Disadvantaged Adults, Dislocated Workers, Veterans, Displaced
Homemakers, Disadvantaged Youths, Persons with Disabilities
and those requiring vocational education.

state council

The Federal Government recognizes the benefits of
coordination between government and business in the areas of
job creation and worker retraining. States are encouraged to
establish one coordinating council to facilitate worker
transition from job to job or from unemployment to
employment.
The council should advise the Governor and state
legislatures as to emerging economic and employment trends,
job creation opportunities, and other employment and job
training needs.

applicant process

States shall centralize the intake of service applicants
(those in need of job training/placement assistance) to
facilitate the coordination of social services, of which job
placement and employment skills are a part.
States are encouraged to utilize the concept of ``one-stop-
shop'' as a means of facilitating centralization.

profiling

The state shall be required to profile/evaluate all
participants in programs funded under this law, to determine
participation eligibility. The profiling should include an
evaluation of the candidate's employment readiness. Since
profiling is already done for unemployment benefits, this
should not be an added burden on states.
States, as part of the profiling process, shall determine,
broadly, the readiness of each candidate to enter the job
market. These candidates shall be defined as:
(a) Job-ready and in need of placement services; (b) job-
ready but in need of minor skills enhancement; (c) non-job-
ready and in need of remedial education and/or major skill
enhancement. Job skills should be addressed after the
candidate has demonstrated an education equivalent to a high
school degree.

program success

Success for those participants needing job placement
services shall be determined by continuous employment for a
period of time of no less than six months, of at least 35
hours per week, with wages of no less than 65% of the
immediate previous wage level.
Success for those participants needing minor skill
enhancement shall be:
(a) Demonstration of proficiency of skill areas assessed as
deficient followed by full time employment; or (b) full time
employment for a period of time of no less than 6 months, of
at least 35 hours per week, with wages of no less than 65% of
the immediate previous wage level.
Success for those participants in need of remedial
education shall be:
(a) Demonstration of proficiency in education and skills
commensurate with a high school degree followed by full time
employment; or (b) full time employment for a period of time
of no less than 6 months, of at least 25 hours per week, with
wages of no less than 65% of the immediate previous wage
level.

State Responsibilities/Reporting Requirements

The States shall report to the Secretary of Labor at the
end of the first full fiscal year after date of enactment and
annually, by fiscal year, thereafter:
(a) Total number of applicants for employment services,
total number of applicants provided some form of service, and
the post evaluation determination of each served applicant
(i.e. was applicant job-ready, in need of minor skill
enhancement, or in need of remedial education/major skill
enhancement).
(b) Total number of successes for each post evaluation
determined group.
(c) Length of time, from time of profiling to time of job
placement, for all applicants during fiscal year.
(d) An accounting of disbursement of appropriated funds.
(e) Report findings of audits performed during reporting
period.
Given sufficient notice of request, States shall provide
any and all additional information requested by the Federal
Government.

secretary of labor's responsibilities

If after consecutive reporting cycles, a state has failed
to demonstrate continued aggregate progress to the success of
the program, the Secretary of Labor shall abrogate funding in
part or in whole to that state. States will have an
opportunity to appeal this decision and such factors as
natural disaster or severe economic downturn could be
considered as justification for renewed funding.
The Secretary of Labor shall annually report to Congress
the results of the Secretary's program oversight.

further restrictions/requirements

None of the funds from this program shall be used for
stipends or direct payments to participants for participation
in the program except for needs-based transportation costs.
However, participants are not excluded from collecting funds
from other programs.
The Secretaries of Labor will jointly administer 5% of the
funds of this Act for Indian tribes and migrant worker
populations. The funds should be distributed according to the
specific populations.
States are encouraged to disregard gender in aiding the
applicant, and allow applicants to participate in education
and job search for non-traditional occupations.

deficit reduction

This proposal generates approximately $7 billion in deficit
reduction over five years.

tax cut

The ``temporary'' 0.2 percent FUTA surtax is repealed,
demonstrating to businesses that some members of Congress are
conscious of the mandates the Federal Government imposes and
are willing to reduce the cost of labor to business to
encourage job growth.

earned income tax credit awareness

During the profiling and evaluation process of each
participant, the participant will be informed if they are
eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit and will be
encouraged to receive the Earned Income Tax Credit on a
monthly, rather than yearly, basis. This is to help increase
the monthly income of eligible participants.
Vol. 141

WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 1995

No. 39

House of Representatives

____________________