Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

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

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



 
        TRAINING AND EDUCATION FOR AMERICAN WORKERS ACT OF 2000

                                _______
                                

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

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                    ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 4402]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

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

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

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

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

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

SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

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

                                Purpose

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

                            Committee Action

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

                                Summary

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

                           job training funds

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

    loan forgiveness for mathematics, science, and reading teachers

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

                            Committee Views

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

                   Local Workforce Investment Boards

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

            Expanded Opportunity for Business Participation

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

                    Expanded Training Opportunities

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

                            Loan Forgiveness

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

                          No Set Authorization

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

                           Section-by-Section

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

                       Explanation of Amendments

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

              Application of Law to the Legislative Branch

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

                       Unfunded Mandate Statement

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

                            Roll Call Votes

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


  Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee

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

   New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

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

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

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

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                                                   2000    2001    2002    2003    2004    2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING

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

                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

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

                           Basis of Estimate

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

                            Direct Spending

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

                   Spending Subject to Appropriation

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

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

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

 Statement of Oversight Findings of the Committee on Government Reform

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

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

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

                           Committee Estimate

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

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

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

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


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

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

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

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

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

                      DISSENTING VIEWS OF RON PAUL

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