U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

92–960 PDF 2016

EXPANDING OPPORTUNITY IN 

AMERICA’S SCHOOLS 

AND WORKPLACES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, FEBRUARY 4, 2015 

Serial No. 114–1 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/ 

committee.action?chamber=house&committee=education 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota, Chairman 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Duncan Hunter, California 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

Tim Walberg, Michigan 

Matt Salmon, Arizona 

Brett Guthrie, Kentucky 

Todd Rokita, Indiana 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Luke Messer, Indiana 

Bradley Byrne, Alabama 

David Brat, Virginia 

Buddy Carter, Georgia 

Michael D. Bishop, Michigan 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Carlos Curbelo, Florida 

Elise Stefanik, New York 

Rick Allen, Georgia 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Ranking Member 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio 

Jared Polis, Colorado 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 

Northern Mariana Islands 

Frederica S. Wilson, Florida 

Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon 

Mark Pocan, Wisconsin 

Mark Takano, California 

Hakeem S. Jeffries, New York 

Katherine M. Clark, Massachusetts 

Alma S. Adams, North Carolina 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Juliane Sullivan, Staff Director 

Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on February 4, 2015 ......................................................................... 1 

Statement of Members: 

Kline, Hon. John, Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 8 

Scott, Hon. Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’, Ranking Member, Committee on Education and the Workforce ............................................................................. 9 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 14 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Amiridis, Michael, Dr., Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC ..................... 24 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 26 

Greenblatt, Drew, Mr., President and CEO, Marlin Steel Wire Products, 

Baltimore, MD ............................................................................................... 47 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 49 

Mishel, Lawrence, Dr., President, Economic Policy Institute, Washington, 

DC .................................................................................................................. 32 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 34 

Pence, Hon. Mike, Governor, State of Indiana, Indianapolis, IN ................. 18 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 20 

Additional Submissions: 

Courtney, Hon. Joe, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Connecticut: 

The Hartford Courant: Connecticut’s Hiring Hasn’t Been This Good 

Since 1998 .............................................................................................. 84 

Chairman Kline: 

Democratic Subcommittee Assignments and Membership .................... 5 

Republican Subcommittee Assignments and Membership .................... 3 

Mr. Scott: 

Chart: When it comes to the pace of annual pay increases ................... 11 

Chart: Middle-class wages are stagnant ................................................. 13 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(1) 

EXPANDING OPPORTUNITY IN AMERICA’S 

SCHOOLS AND WORKPLACES 

Wednesday, February 4, 2015 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:04 a.m., in room 

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Kline [chairman 

of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Kline, Wilson, Foxx, Thompson, 

Walberg, Guthrie, Rokita, Messer, Brat, Carter, Bishop, Grothman, 

Russell, Curbelo, Stefanik, Allen, Scott, Hinojosa, Grijalva, Courtney, Fudge, Polis, Sablan, Wilson, Bonamici, Pocan, Takano, 

Jeffries, Clark, Adams, and DeSaulnier. 

Staff present: Lauren Aronson, Press Secretary; Ed Gilroy, Director of Workforce Policy; Callie Harman, Staff Assistant; Christie 

Herman, Professional Staff Member; Marvin Kaplan, Workforce 

Policy Counsel; Nancy Locke, Chief Clerk; Zachary McHenry, Legislative Assistant; Daniel Murner, Deputy Press Secretary; Brian 

Newell, Communications Director; Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; Lauren Reddington, Deputy Press Secretary; Molly McLaughlin 

Salmi, Deputy Director of Workforce Policy; Mandy Schaumburg, 

Education Deputy Director and Senior Counsel; Emily Slack, Professional Staff Member; Alissa Strawcutter, Deputy Clerk; Juliane 

Sullivan, Staff Director; Alexa Turner, Legislative Assistant; Joseph Wheeler, Professional Staff Member; Tylease Alli, Minority 

Clerk/Intern and Fellow Coordinator; Austin Barbera, Minority 

Staff Assistant; Amy Cocuzza, Minority Labor Detailee; Eamonn 

Collins, Minority Education Policy Advisor; Denise Forte, Minority 

Staff Director; Melissa Greenberg, Minority Labor Policy Associate; 

Carolyn Hughes, Minority Senior Labor Policy Advisor; Eunice 

Ikene, Minority Labor Policy Associate; Brian Kennedy, Minority 

General Counsel; Brian Levin, Minority Press Secretary; Richard 

Miller, Minority Senior Labor Policy Advisor; Amy Peake, Minority 

Labor Policy Advisor; and Rayna Reid, Minority Labor Policy Counsel. 

Chairman KLINE. A quorum being present, the Committee on 

Education and the Workforce will come to order. 

Before we turn our attention to this morning’s hearing, I would 

like to take care of an administrative matter. At the committee’s 

January 21, meeting we welcomed our new members to the comCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

2 

mittee. Today, both the Republicans and Democrats have completed assigning members to the subcommittees. 

I ask unanimous consent on behalf of myself and Mr. Scott, the 

committee’s ranking member, to submit those assignments for the 

record. 

Mr. SCOTT. Without objection— 

Chairman KLINE. We will give you every opportunity. 

[The information follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

3 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 38 here 92960.038
4 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 39 here 92960.039
5 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 3 here 92960.003
6 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 4 here 92960.004
7 

Chairman KLINE. Without objection, the subcommittee assignments are made. 

Turning to our hearing, and Governor Pence is with us; he will 

be joining here in just a moment, but I would like to go ahead and 

get started. 

So I am going to recognize myself for my opening comments. 

Welcome, to witnesses and guests. I would like to extend a special welcome to our former colleague, Indiana Governor Mike 

Pence, who, I just mentioned, will be joining us shortly. 

Last week, we were reminded once again of the persistent challenges facing the American people. The Department of Commerce 

reported that the economy grew a meager 2.6 percent in the last 

quarter of 2014. According to the Wall Street Journal, we have now 

experienced nine straight years of growth below 3 percent. 

This anemic economy is hurting families across the country. It is 

hurting nearly 9 million workers who remain unemployed; it is 

hurting more than 6 million workers who need full-time jobs, but 

can only find part-time work; it is hurting moms and dads trying 

to pay the bills and put food on the table with smaller paychecks. 

As workplaces continue to struggle, so do the nation’s schools. 

One out of five students will drop out of high school before receiving a diploma. 

Making matters worse, far too many students graduate without 

the knowledge and skills they need to pursue higher education or 

compete in the workforce. Meanwhile, college costs continue to soar 

and graduates are leaving college with too much debt and too few 

job prospects. 

These are tough problems that have been around for years, and 

unfortunately, the President’s policies are making them worse. The 

administration continues to pursue new rules and regulations that 

jeopardize employee rights, stymie growth, and make it harder for 

employers to raise wages and create new jobs. 

A convoluted waiver system is creating more confusion and uncertainty in K–12 schools, and flawed regulatory schemes will deny 

students access to the college or university of their choice. 

Just this week, the President put forward a budget proposal that 

calls for more spending, more taxes, and more borrowing to create 

new government programs. Middle-class families are being 

squeezed, and a larger federal presence in classrooms and workplaces is not the answer. 

The President wants us to double down on the failed policies of 

the last six years. The American people deserve better. We need to 

do better. 

We must provide employers certainty and flexibility so they can 

grow their businesses, create new jobs, and give workers the raise 

they have earned. We must help more students pursue the dream 

of a college degree without living in a nightmare of debt and unemployment. 

We must advance K–12 education reform that empowers parents 

and places more control in the hands of teachers and local decisionmakers. We must modernize our pension system and hold the administration accountable for policies that make it harder for individuals to succeed in school and the workplace. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

8 

The American people are desperate to move the country in a new 

direction. They are not willing to accept slow growth and stagnant 

wages as the new normal. 

They deserve bold solutions that will lead to a strong, vibrant 

economy, more good-paying jobs, and higher incomes for working 

families. These are the priorities shared by most Americans and 

they must be our priorities as well. 

In the coming months, we intend to advance responsible reforms 

that will help make a difference in the lives of students, employers, 

teachers, and working families. We have an excellent panel of witnesses to tell us what is working and what isn’t and to help inform 

our efforts moving forward. 

Again, I want to thank our witnesses for joining us, and I look 

forward to our discussion. 

Before I recognize Ranking Member Scott, I would like to take 

just a brief moment to say a few words about one member who is 

unable to join us today. Congressman Phil Roe recently learned 

that a member of his family is battling a serious illness and has 

taken some time to support his family. I ask my colleagues to 

please lift up your prayers to Phil and the entire Roe family. 

With that, I will now recognize the committee’s ranking member, 

my colleague, Bobby Scott, for his opening remarks. 

[The statement of Chairman Kline follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. John Kline, Chairman 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Good morning, and welcome to our guests. We have a distinguished panel of witnesses, including the First Lady of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Mrs. Dorothy 

McAuliffe. Mrs. McAuliffe, we are delighted to have you with us this morning as 

we discuss important policies affecting our nation’s students and families. 

Healthy meals are vitally important to a child’s education. It’s just basic commonsense that if a child is hungry then he or she is less likely to succeed in the classroom and later in life. That is why our nation has long invested in services that 

provide low-income students nutritious meals in schools. Those services are authorized through a number of laws, such as the Richard B. Russell National School 

Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act. 

In just a few short months, these laws and the programs they authorize will expire, including the national school lunch and breakfast programs, the Supplemental 

Nutritional Program for Women, Infants, and Children or WIC Program, and several others. It’s the responsibility of this committee and Congress to reauthorize 

these programs so that students and families receive the support they need in the 

most efficient and effective way. 

Why is that important? Because no child should go to school hungry – it’s that 

simple. Today’s discussion is not about whether we agree on this basic principle; I 

am confident we all do. Instead, our discussion today is about beginning a larger 

effort we will continue in the coming months to ensure the best policies are in place 

to help reach this goal. 

Last week, I had an opportunity to tour a school lunchroom at the Prior Lake 

High School in Savage, Minnesota. Students and faculty described what’s working 

and what isn’t working in federal nutrition programs. As a result of our conversation, two important realities became abundantly clear. 

First, our school nutrition professionals are dedicated men and women doing the 

best they can under difficult circumstances, and no one should question their commitment to providing students nutritious meals. Unfortunately, rules and regulations put in place in recent years have made their jobs harder, not easier. The cost 

of the lunch and breakfast programs for schools are going up, yet fewer meals are 

being served. In fact, the number of children participating in these programs is declining more rapidly than any period over the last 30 years. 

Second, as we reauthorize these programs, we have to provide more flexibility at 

the state and local levels. Those working in our schools and cafeterias recognize that 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

9 

this has to be a priority. Even students understand the urgent need for more flexibility. 

During my visit to Prior Lake High School, I talked with a number of students 

about their school lunch program. Right now, the federal government determines 

the number of calories, vegetables, and grains that are served to students, which 

means Washington is dictating how much food every child is served at every school 

meal. That is one reason why students are urging the school to drop out of the program. Many children are bringing food from home or buying more food because the 

portion sizes served at school are too small for a full meal. As one student, Corinna 

Swiggum, noted, ‘‘A lot of time, we’re going back and getting junk food, not healthy 

food.’’ 

This isn’t what these children want. This isn’t what their parents or school administrators want, and it’s not what we want either. We have to find a better way 

forward, one that continues our commitment to healthy, nutritious meals for America’s students, while giving state and school leaders the flexibility they need to make 

it a reality. 

Again, that is why we are delighted to have you here today Mrs. McAuliffe. 

Through your ‘‘Eat Smart, Move More’’ initiative, you are setting an example for 

other states to build upon. You are demonstrating that promoting healthy lifestyles 

is not just a federal priority, but a state and local priority as well. 

Often we are told we need more federal involvement because states can’t be trusted to help those in need. But through your leadership, you’re demonstrating states 

can take the lead on tough issues in partnership with the federal government. 

Thank you for your work on this important issue, and to all our witnesses, thank 

you for participating in today’s hearing and working with us to strengthen child nutrition support. 

With that, I will now recognize the committee’s ranking member, my colleague 

Congressman Scott, for his opening remarks. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And our thoughts and 

prayers are with our colleague, Dr. Roe, and I wish his family well. 

Good morning, and I want to thank our witnesses for being here 

for the first full committee hearing of the 114th Congress, especially our former member from Indiana. Today’s hearing allows us 

to hear testimony from a distinguished panel about steps that 

states and institutions of higher education and business are taking 

to improve the well-being of students, families, and workers in our 

country, and I look forward to learning more from our witnesses. 

Mr. Chairman, I would point out that I had hoped that our first 

hearing would be to consider testimony on legislation that was introduced yesterday, H.R. 5, which would reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I am disappointed that the majority has chosen to move forward on the reauthorization without 

holding a single hearing. 

Hearings provide the public with the opportunity to explore the 

research and evidence that is critical to making evidence-based policy decisions. When it comes to improving the academic achievement of our children, we need the best research to help form the 

basis for any reauthorization. 

Failure to seek input from experts and various stakeholders and 

embarking on an expedited process is a disservice to the 50-year 

bipartisan history of ESEA, and, more importantly, a disservice to 

our nation’s children. So tomorrow we will be holding a forum on 

ESEA, to which all members of the committee are invited. This 

forum will serve as one opportunity to explore what works to improve education. 

But on the issue of the opportunity for students and our workers, 

our country has come a long way since the depths of the Great Recession. Unemployment has dropped to 5.6 percent, its lowest rate 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

10 

since 2008. The private sector has experienced a record 58 consecutive months of job growth, and each of the past 11 months the 

economy has added over 200,000 private sector jobs, a growth rate 

not seen since the 1990s. 

But success in the labor market has yet to translate into higher 

wages for the majority of workers, and the gap between the haves 

and have-nots continues to expand. This chart points out that 

wages for the top 1 percent since 1979 have grown over 138 percent, while the bottom 90 percent just grew 15 percent. 

[The information follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

11 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 40 here 92960.040
12 

And the income for the top 1 percent rose from $871,000 in 2009 to $968,000 in the course of just the last year. But for the remaining 99 percent, the income rate has actually declined over the same 

period. 

This next chart gives a better idea of what has happened to the 

middle class wages from 1979 to 2013. Middle class wages have 

grown a mere 6 percent, while low-wage workers actually declined 

5 percent. 

[The information follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

13 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 41 here 92960.041
14 

Congress must ensure that all workers see our economy’s improvement reflected in their paychecks. This includes raising the 

national minimum wage, increasing overtime pay protections, and 

strengthening workers’ ability to collectively bargain on their behalf. 

We also must continue to expand the bipartisan achievements of 

the Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act to promote and develop skills which lead to in-demand, higher-paying jobs. Our investment in our country’s workforce must start early. The success 

of our children directly relates to the long-term health of our workforce and our economy. 

In fact, a study just released by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth shows that improving our educational performance 

could substantially increase our gross domestic product over the 

next 35 years. Only through continued investment in high-quality 

education and through working to reduce inequality in our educational system can our country continue to thrive. We must make 

sure that all students are receiving an education that prepares 

them for college or a career. 

And we must also improve access to higher education. Research 

from the Georgetown University Center on Education and the 

Workforce shows that by 2018 we will need 22 million new college 

degrees, and at the rate we are going we are going to fall short by 

3 million. 

A college education is important not only for our economy, but 

also for students’ future wages. College graduates earn an average 

of $46,000 a year, where those with only a high school diploma 

earn less than half of that. 

But the cost of pursuing a college degree has become even more 

daunting. Skyrocketing college costs have forced students and families to incur greater and greater loan debt. 

Seven in 10 graduating seniors in 2013 had to borrow money averaging $28,000 or more. Student debt now stands at over $1.2 

trillion and is certainly a drag on our economic growth. 

I hope the committee can find areas of common ground to address these challenges, and I look forward to hearing from witnesses on how we can expand opportunity for students and our 

workers. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

[The statement of Mr. Scott follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Ranking Member, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good Morning, I want to thank our witnesses for being here today for our first 

full committee hearing of the 114th Congress. 

Today’s hearing allows us to hear testimony from a distinguished panel about the 

steps that states, institutions of higher education and business are taking to improve the well-being of students, families and workers in our country. I look forward 

to learning more from the witnesses. 

However, Mr. Chairman, I had hoped that our first hearing would be to consider 

testimony on the legislation you introduced yesterday, H.R. 5, which would reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

I am disappointed the majority has chosen to move forward with their Elementary 

and Secondary Act reauthorization without holding a single hearing. Hearings provide the public with the opportunity to explore the research and evidence that is 

critical to the making evidence-based policy decisions. And when it comes to improvCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

15 

ing the academic achievement of all children, we need the best research to help form 

the basis of any reauthorization. 

Failure to seek input from experts and various stakeholders, and embarking on 

an expedited process is a disservice to the fifty-year, bipartisan history of ESEA 

and, more importantly, a disservice to our nation’s children. 

So tomorrow, we are holding a Democratic forum on ESEA to which all members 

of the committee are invited. This forum will serve as one opportunity to explore 

what works to improve education. 

Our country has come a long way since the depths of the Great Recession. Unemployment has dropped to 5.6 percent, its lowest rate since 2008. The private sector 

has experienced a record 58 consecutive months of job growth. Each of the past 11 

months, the economy has added 200,000 private sector jobs—growth not seen since 

the 1990s. 

But success in the labor market has yet to translate into higher wages for the 

majority of workers and the gap between the ‘‘haves’’ and ‘‘have-nots’’ continues to 

expand. 

As the first chart points out, wages for the top 1% have grown 138% since 1979, 

while wages for the bottom 90% grew at just 15%. And the average income for the 

top 1 percent rose from $871,100 in 2009 to $968,000 over the course of 2012 and 

2013, but for the remaining 99 percent, average income actually declined slightly 

over the same period. 

The next graph gives us a better idea of what has happened to middle-class 

wages: from 1979 to 2013, middle-class wages have grown a mere 6%, with lowwage workers’ wages actually declining 5%. 

Congress must ensure that all workers see our economy’s improvements reflected 

in their paychecks. This includes: 

* Raising the national minimum wage; 

* Increasing overtime pay protections; and 

* Strengthening workers’ ability to collectively bargain on their behalf. 

We also must continue to expand on the bipartisan achievements of the Workforce 

Innovation and Opportunities Act (WIOA) to promote and develop skills that lead 

to in-demand, higher-paying jobs. 

However, investment in our country’s workforce must start early: the success of 

our children directly relates to the long-term health of our workforce and our economy. In fact, a study released just this week by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth shows that improving our educational performance could substantially 

increase our gross domestic product over the next 35 years. Only through continued 

investment in high-quality education and through working to reduce inequality in 

our education system can our country continue to thrive. And we make sure all students are receiving an education that prepares them for college or career. 

We must also improve access to higher education. Research from the Georgetown 

University Center on Education and the Workforce shows that by 2018, we will need 

22 million new college degrees, but we will fall short by at least 3 million. 

A college education is important not only for our economy, but also for a student’s 

future earnings. College graduates, on average, earn $46,900 a year, whereas those 

with only a high school diploma earn less than half that. 

But the cost of pursuing a college degree has become even more daunting. Skyrocketing college costs have forced students and families to incur greater and greater loan debt. Seven in 10 graduating seniors in 2013 had to borrow loans averaging 

$28,400. Student debt now stands at over $1.2 trillion and is a drag on our economic 

growth. 

I hope the Committee can find areas of common ground to address these challenges. 

And I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about how we can expand opportunity for students and workers. 

Thank you and I yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Pursuant to committee rule 7(c), all members will be permitted 

to submit written statements to be included in the permanent 

hearing record. Without objection, the hearing record will remain 

open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous 

material referenced during the hearing to be submitted for the official hearing record. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

16 

And I know Governor Pence has heard that phrase 1,000 times. 

Seems a little strange to have you down there instead of up here. 

But to that end, we are going to move to introducing our distinguished witnesses, and I will start by recognizing Mr. Rokita, followed by Mr. Messer, to introduce their governor. 

Mr. Rokita? 

Mr. ROKITA. Well, good morning. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, 

for the privilege of introducing our good friend and one of Indiana’s 

favorite sons, a true leader, Mike Pence. 

Many of us have worked with Governor Pence here in the House, 

and we are pleased to see his public service continue. 

He is a cutting-edge policymaker. He is a solution-oriented leader. 

And perhaps most obvious to many of us, he serves with a servant’s heart in all versions of that definition. Governor Pence deserves a great deal of credit for fostering education and economic 

opportunity in our great state. 

And, Mr. Chairman, I will simply let him tell us more about that. 

It is an honor to have you here with us today, Governor. Thank 

you for your service. 

Mr. MESSER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Mr. Rokita. 

It is my honor to be able to introduce a proud son of Indiana’s 

6th Congressional District, my friend—I am proud to call Mike 

Pence my governor, but I am even prouder to call him my friend. 

He is, as you will learn today, an incredible innovator in the area 

of education, somebody who is expanding vocational opportunities 

in our state, somebody who is a great champion for school choice 

initiatives in our state, somebody who understands that we cannot 

rest as a nation until every child in America has an opportunity 

to go to a great school, and understands the simple principle that 

no child in America should have a wait list to their future. 

Thank you for being here today, Governor. We are proud to have 

you. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

I would now like to recognize Mr. Wilson to introduce our second 

witness. 

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And this is really a special day for the Wilson family. My wife 

is going to be here in a minute, because two of her favorite people 

on earth are sitting up front: Mike Pence and Provost Michael 

Amiridis. Hey, she loves to see Chairman Kline, but this is much 

better, so— 

Chairman KLINE. Too late. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. No, no this is good. 

But as a grateful graduate of the University of South Carolina 

myself, I really appreciate Dr. Michael Amiridis being here today 

and for his service to the University of South Carolina, its students, as provost and executive vice president of academic affairs. 

Dr. Amiridis has been an integral part of the University of South 

Carolina since 1994, when he started as an assistant professor. He 

has served as provost since 2009. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

17 

As a continuing professor of chemical engineering, Dr. Amiridis 

has taught several courses in kinetics, reactor design, and catalysis, and has received numerous college and university awards recognizing his teaching ability and research efforts. 

Though the University of South Carolina will surely miss him, 

we wish him well in his future endeavors as the new chancellor of 

the University of Illinois at Chicago, beginning next month. 

Godspeed, Dr. Amiridis. 

Thank you. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Now it is my turn to introduce the next two witnesses. 

Dr. Lawrence Mishel is the president of the Economic Policy Institute, EPI. During his time at EPI he has focused on U.S. living 

standards and labor markets. Prior to joining EPI, he held a number of research roles, was a faculty member at Cornell University 

School of Industrial and Labor Relations, and was an economist for 

several unions, including the United Auto Workers, the United 

Steelworkers, AFSCME, and the Industrial Union Department of 

the AFL–CIO. 

Welcome. 

Mr. Drew Greenblatt is president and CEO of Marlin Steel in 

Baltimore, Maryland, a company of 30 employees that manufactures materials handling baskets, sheet metal fabrications, wire 

forms, and machine products for aerospace, automotive, medical, 

pharmaceutical, industrial, and military applications. Mr. 

Greenblatt served on the board of the National Association of Manufacturers from September 2007 to September 2009 and is currently the chair of their Small Business Tax Policy Task Force. 

We have a new policy, which I think has been explained to the 

witnesses, that we have adopted across the committees in the 

House based on a Department of Justice recent ruling, and so I am 

going to ask the witnesses to stand and raise your right hand. 

[Witnesses sworn.] 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you. Please be seated. 

And let the record reflect the witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

Before I recognize you to provide your testimony, let me briefly 

explain our lighting system. It is not all that innovative or unusual 

so I don’t think this will be too hard. 

You have five minutes to present your testimony. When you 

begin, the light in front of you will turn green; when one minute 

is left, the light will turn yellow; when your time is expired, the 

light will turn red. 

At that point, I will ask that you wrap up your remarks as best 

you are able. It has been a very long time since I have gaveled 

down a witness because they ran over, but please be aware that 

there are the four of you and that we want the opportunity to ask 

questions. 

When it comes to member questions, I am much quicker to drop 

the gavel, as I will try to hold my colleagues to their five minutes. 

So, Governor Pence, you are recognized. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

18 

STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE PENCE, GOVERNOR, STATE OF 

INDIANA, INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 

Governor PENCE. Thank you, Chairman Kline, and to Ranking 

Member Scott. Thank you for the invitation to come before you 

today and talk about what it is to be a part of a state that works, 

and particularly works for education. 

I am grateful to have the opportunity to appear before all the 

distinguished members of this committee, many of whom I had the 

great privilege of serving with in the House of Representatives. 

And so let me thank all of you for the ongoing sacrifices that you 

personally and your families make as you serve the American people in this important time in the life of our nation. 

Obviously, I am extremely grateful for the service and the leadership and the esteem of Congressman Rokita and Congressman 

Messer. 

Thank you for your kind comments. More importantly, thank you 

for your outstanding service to the people of Indiana and the people 

of our country. 

I have been in office as governor for a little over two years, and, 

Mr. Chairman, I would say with the deepest respect to my former 

colleagues that I am persuaded, having spent 12 years in the Congress and two years as a governor, that the cure for what ails this 

country will come as much from our nation’s state capitals as it 

ever will from our nation’s capital. 

And I am very grateful for the efforts of this Congress, last Congress in the Workforce Investment Act, and as you move forward in 

reaffirming and restoring local control in education, that there is 

a clear recognition of that. 

In Indiana, in the category of education, we believe our state has 

the privilege of really being one of the leading innovators in education and expanding opportunity for all of our kids in this country. 

We are a state that is growing economically: more than 100,000 net 

new jobs since I took over; unemployment has dropped from over 

8 percent to now 5.8 percent in Indiana. 

But we realized early on in our state that if we can’t succeed in 

the classroom, we won’t succeed in the marketplace. And so Indiana has been driving education innovation, funding our traditional 

K–12 schools, and promoting public charter school innovation. 

We are proud in the Hoosier state to be home now to the largest 

educational voucher program in the United States of America. In 

K–12 education, I am pleased to report to you graduation rates are 

up, test scores are up, and the state of Indiana recently ranked second in the nation in total growth on the Nation’s Report Card, 

known as the NAEP. 

Our charter schools serve more than 35,000 students across the 

state of Indiana, and, as I mentioned, our voucher program not 

only encompasses now some 30,000 students, but four out of five 

of our voucher students attend schools that are ranked ‘‘A’’ or ‘‘B’’ 

in the state’s accountability system. 

Our current session of the general assembly is underway and we 

have reached a broad consensus that it will be an education session. We put forward a series of initiatives, the goal of which is to 

arrive at the fall of the year 2020 and have 100,000 more kids attending ‘‘B’’ or better schools in the state of Indiana. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

19 

To accomplish that, we are calling for a significant increase in 

traditional K–12 funding, with a special emphasis on giving greater 

flexibility in our classrooms to pay good teachers more. As the 

chairman remembers, I have been married to a school teacher now 

for 30 years this year, and I learned a long time ago that good 

teachers make the difference. 

And I said recently to our general assembly that if you want 

more good teachers then pay good teachers more. We are going to 

work to do that in the state of Indiana and give schools the flexibility to do that. We are also going to raise the foundation under 

our public charter program and lift the cap on our voucher program. 

Most enthusiasm in our state, I believe, centers not just around 

those initiatives, but I believe Indiana will be the first state in 

America to make career and vocational education a priority in 

every high school again. We have been working with unanimous bipartisan support in our general assembly to both redesign career 

and technical education at the high school level in Indiana, and 

now in this session of our general assembly we will be funding it. 

So my word is, as I watch the clock and know the chairman well 

enough to know the gavel is close, my word to all of you is a word 

of thanks for your leadership. I look forward to a dialogue today. 

But my request simply is that Indiana has demonstrated the 

kind of innovation that is benefiting our children; it is expanding 

educational choices both within our public systems, as well as private school choice in our state, so as you go through the process 

of legislating this year that you think of resources, not red tape. 

I really do believe that to the extent that this Congress can give 

states like Indiana more freedom, more flexibility to innovate, our 

children, our states, and our people will be the beneficiaries. 

So thank you very much, and I yield back. 

[The statement of Governor Pence follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

20 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 34 here 92960.034
21 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 35 here 92960.035
22 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 36 here 92960.036
23 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 37 here 92960.037
24 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you very much, Governor. 

Now I would like to recognize Dr. Amiridis for five minutes. 

STATEMENT OF DR. MICHAEL AMIRIDIS, PROVOST AND EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman Kline, Ranking Member Scott, and distinguished 

members of the committee, it is an honor and a privilege for me 

personally and for the University of South Carolina to appear in 

front of you today. 

The changes we have experienced in higher education in the last 

five years are unprecedented. It is not only the operational and 

funding models that are changing drastically, but it is also the expectations of the public, of our students, and their parents that 

have shifted dramatically. 

Given this environment, some of my colleagues in academia are 

actually pessimistic about the future of our universities. 

In contrast, I believe that the best days for our public research 

universities are ahead of us. I believe that the public’s demand for 

transparency and accountability gives us a wonderful vehicle to 

demonstrate the great success we have had in educating the sons 

and daughters of our country and preparing them for the workforce. 

I believe that the expectations of the students and parents for job 

skills and employability have motivated us to reexamine and modernize our programs. And I believe that the current environment 

is ideal for the establishment of public-private partnerships to support critical functions of our public universities, taking advantage 

of the experience and efficiency of the private sector. 

And yes, all of this can be achieved while we continue to increase 

efficiencies and control costs so that we remain accessible and affordable. 

There is no doubt that we will also continue to face significant 

challenges in higher education. Decreased funding both for instruction at the state level in many states, and for research at the federal agency level, has resulted in significant financial pressures on 

the operation of our universities. 

An increasingly larger fraction of the cost of undergraduate instruction has been passed to the students and their families 

through increases in tuition, creating a situation where we are 

pricing out, even from our public universities, a growing percentage 

of our high school graduates. At the same time, it has become more 

difficult for the research universities to sustain financially the efforts that have contributed to the world-leading position of our 

country in technology and creating an innovation deficit. 

Finally, due to a growing regulatory framework both at the state 

and federal levels, the amount of time and effort needed to satisfy 

report requirements has grown exponentially with clear cost consequences for us. 

In this environment there are going to be universities that thrive 

at the same time that others will struggle to maintain status quo. 

The difference will be the ability to come up with and implement 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

25 

innovative ideas quickly, and I am here today to offer a few examples of such innovative programs in South Carolina. 

Our Palmetto College provides the opportunity to place-bound 

South Carolinians to complete their undergraduate degrees online 

after they have studied for two years in a university, a community 

college, or a technical college. It allows students in vocationally oriented degree programs to develop the skills needed for available 

jobs in their local communities; it provides local advising, career 

counseling services, utilizing the existing network of campuses in 

our system; and most importantly, it reduces cost of attendance 

and student debt by maintaining affordable tuition. 

In the two years since its inception in 2013, more than 1,000 students have enrolled in these degree programs, and 200 of them 

have already graduated. 

Our ‘‘On Your Time’’ initiative utilizes the full calendar to give 

our students more flexibility in academic planning to facilitate 

timely graduation. It expands the traditional summer programs to 

a full semester; it allows students to take advantage of work, service, or other opportunities year-round without the risk of extending 

their time to graduation and their debt; and it creates summer immersion institutes in high-demand areas for students who want to 

enhance their marketable job skills in a short period of time. 

The added flexibility allows for over 50 percent of the bachelor’s 

degrees offered by the University of South Carolina to be completed 

on an accelerated timeframe, consistent with the preference of over 

40 percent of our freshmen and sophomore students who would like 

the opportunity to complete their baccalaureate degree in less than 

four years. 

Additional examples—our USC Connect program and Gamecock 

Guarantee programs—are described in detail in the written testimony. 

We pledge to continue developing such ideas, as I know many of 

our colleagues also do across the country, but we also need your 

help. We need your help in continuing to support need-based federal funding for our students. We need your help in continuing to 

provide federal support for academic research so that we close the 

innovation deficit. 

And finally, we need your help in controlling a growing regulatory framework—put in place, in most cases, with good intentions 

in order to control a few bad actors—although the tools are already 

in place to do so. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you for 

the opportunity to join you today. And on behalf of our students, 

their families, and our faculty and staff members, I thank you for 

your commitment to and support of higher education, and in particular, the public higher education sector that I come from. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Dr. Amiridis follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

26 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 5 here 92960.005
27 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 6 here 92960.006
28 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 7 here 92960.007
29 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 8 here 92960.008
30 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 9 here 92960.009
31 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 10 here 92960.010
32 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you, sir. 

Now, Dr. Mishel, please? You are recognized for five minutes. 

STATEMENT OF DR. LAWRENCE MISHEL, PH.D., PRESIDENT, 

ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Mr. MISHEL. Thank you very much. 

Chairman Kline, Ranking Member Scott, members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to address the state of the 

economy and the prospects for America’s workers. 

My testimony today will focus on the key economic challenge we 

face, which is middle-income stagnation. It is just common sense 

that wage trends lay at the heart of this issue. 

After all, middle-income families are essentially those who rely 

almost entirely on their jobs for what they get to spend. They don’t 

have financial assets that produce income. This is also true for lowincome households, so lifting people out of poverty and strengthening the middle class is essentially that wage growth. 

Let me offer a few facts to start the discussion. First, as Mr. 

Scott noted, the top 1 percent saw their wages rise by 138 percent 

since 1979, while the bottom 90 percent saw a rise of just 15 percent, most of that in the late 1990s. 

Secondly, we have seen substantial productivity growth since 

1973, up 74 percent. But a typical worker’s pay only rose 9 percent. 

So this is a very long-term issue and it is not about generating productivity; it is about making sure that productivity is shared by the 

vast majority. 

Last, it is also worth noting that wages have been stagnant for 

the last 10 years in the last recovery as well as this one, for both 

blue-collar and white-collar workers, both college graduates and 

high school-educated workers. 

Some people think that these problems stem from a so-called 

skills mismatch, that somehow those without a college degree just 

don’t have the skills needed for today’s economy. That is simply not 

true. 

Evidence from many studies shows that since 2000 the jobs that 

we have been creating have been concentrated at the very low end. 

The jobs in the upper half of the wage scale, which require the 

most education, have not expanded their share of employment 

whatsoever. In fact, we see college wages stagnant, new graduates 

from colleges taking jobs with fewer wages and fewer benefits. 

So what are some of the things that can be done by this committee to actually address this problem? First, you should raise the 

minimum wage to $12.50 by 2020, which will benefit a third of the 

workforce directly and indirectly. 

Second, we need to update the overtime rules. It used to be that 

two-thirds of salaried workers qualified for overtime; now it is only 

11 percent. Hopefully the administration will raise the threshold 

and add 6 million people to that protection. 

Third, we need to strengthen the rights to collective bargaining. 

The biggest shock to wages over the last 30 years has been the erosion of collective bargaining, which has hurt the wages of those 

who used to benefit from collective bargaining, but even more so 

those who benefited, non-union workers, whose wages were lifted 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

33 

by their employers who were fearful that they would leave the job 

and take a better-paying job. 

Fourth, we need to regularize undocumented workers. These 

workers are exploited. They earn lower wages. Regularizing them 

will raise their wages and also lift the wages of those in similar 

fields of work. 

Fifth, let’s end forced arbitration, systems where employers force 

workers to not be able to go to agencies or courts for remedies— 

for wage and hour violations or discrimination. 

Sixth, we need to modernize our labor standards. It is not 

enough to just protect the New Deal standards; we need to bring 

new standards to allow families to mesh work and family. We need 

paid sick leave, paid family leave, and standards like that. 

Seventh, we need to close race and gender inequities. Many of 

the policies I have discussed will do that, but we also need consistent, strong enforcement of antidiscrimination laws. 

Eighth, we need fair contracting, like what the President has 

proposed. These new rules will help reduce wage theft, obtain 

greater racial and gender equity, and generally support wage 

growth. 

Last, we need to tackle misclassification, wage theft, and protect 

prevailing wages. These are all things that will help lift wages. 

What won’t help is tax cuts. Tax cuts won’t generate economic 

growth. The growth they will benefit will not necessarily trickle 

down to wages. 

The taxes paid by a middle-class family, according to CBO, used 

to be 18 percent in 1979. It is now down to 11 percent. That is not 

the problem we have faced. 

Last, it is not so much getting more people to go to college. It 

is about making sure that those people, with whatever degree they 

have, see rising wages. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity. 

[The statement of Dr. Mishel follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

34 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 21 here 92960.021
35 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 22 here 92960.022
36 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 23 here 92960.023
37 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 24 here 92960.024
38 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 25 here 92960.025
39 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 26 here 92960.026
40 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 27 here 92960.027
41 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 28 here 92960.028
42 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 29 here 92960.029
43 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 30 here 92960.030
44 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 31 here 92960.031
45 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 32 here 92960.032
46 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 33 here 92960.033
47 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you, sir. 

Now, Mr. Greenblatt, you are recognized for five minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MR. DREW GREENBLATT, PRESIDENT AND 

CEO, MARLIN STEEL WIRE PRODUCTS, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Good morning, Chairman Kline, Ranking 

Member Scott, and distinguished members of the committee. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you and for holding 

this hearing today. 

My name is Drew Greenblatt, and I am the president and owner 

of Marlin Steel. I am currently on the executive committee of the 

National Association of Manufacturers and serve as the vice chair 

of its Small and Medium Manufacturers Group. 

Here are some facts about U.S. manufacturing: conventional wisdom is wrong. The United States is the world’s largest manufacturing economy. We produce 21 percent of the global manufactured 

products created. 

More than 12 million Americans—that is 9 percent of our workforce—are employed directly in manufacturing. That is almost the 

population of Minnesota and Virginia combined. 

The American manufacturing renaissance is real. As president of 

Marlin Steel, I am optimistic about the future, and I know many 

of my colleagues on the board of directors of the National Association of Manufacturers share my view. We are bullish. 

At Marlin Steel we are expanding our factory floor space 53 percent. We will be investing in new infrastructure, which will allow 

my factory to draw seven times more power—we are bringing in a 

huge copper wire—so we can grow more technology, more robots, 

more automation in our factory. Seven times more power. 

This automation will give us new technology, so we can hire 

more additional high-priced talent to meet our new demand. 

Marlin Steel employs 30 people, and we make custom wire material handling baskets, wire forms, sheet metal fabrications like this 

one right here, and we service the markets of automotive, pharmaceutical, medical, all kinds of industrial markets. 

Six of our employees are degreed mechanical engineers, and their 

innovations are what make our products first-class. They create our 

secret sauce. That is what differentiates us so we are not a commodity player. 

They are so talented we actually export to 37 countries, including 

my favorite country to export to, China. We are really proud of 

that. We import nothing, and we make everything in Baltimore 

City, Maryland. 

I am proud of my team. They are exceptional and by far my most 

important asset. I am also very proud to say we have gone more 

than 2,243 days without a safety incident. 

My optimism for the future of manufacturing generally, and Marlin Steel in particular, is tempered, however, due to government 

policies that are hindering our dynamic growth. 

In order for us to succeed, manufacturers need our elected leaders to choose policies that make our nation a better place to invest, 

to innovate, to headquarter, and from which to export. They must 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

48 

choose policies that strengthen our workforce so it meets the need 

of manufacturing in the 21st Century. 

Manufacturers seek a coherent strategy from policymakers in 

Washington that focus on ways we can ensure the future success 

of manufacturing in our country. We need policies that are grounded in free enterprise and competitiveness, individual liberty, and 

equal opportunity. 

To achieve this target, the National Association of Manufacturers 

has established four goals. We believe they are achievable, and if 

we can maintain these we will strengthen our country’s economic 

advantage. 

Number one: The United States will be the best place in the 

world to manufacture and attract foreign direct investment. 

Number two: Manufacturers in the United States will be the 

world’s leading innovators. 

Number three: The United States will expand access to global 

markets. We need to sell to more countries. 95 percent of the 

world’s consumers live overseas. 

Number four: Manufacturers in the United States will have access to the workforce that the 21st Century economy demands. 

The National Association of Manufactures growth agenda can 

bring our country together and put more people to work, ensuring 

the United States always remains the brightest beacon of hope, optimism, and opportunity in the world. The agenda before the Education and Workforce Committee is an essential part of achieving 

these goals. 

Whether the work you are doing is focused on workforce, training, health care, immigration, labor, employment, please know you 

are shaping the trajectory of manufacturing. Manufacturers can 

compete globally, but we should not have to compete as an economic priority here at home. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify today, and 

I am happy to answer any of your questions. 

[The statement of Mr. Greenblatt follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

49 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 11 here 92960.011
50 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 12 here 92960.012
51 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 13 here 92960.013
52 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 14 here 92960.014
53 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 15 here 92960.015
54 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 16 here 92960.016
55 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 17 here 92960.017
56 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 18 here 92960.018
57 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 19 here 92960.019
58 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 20 here 92960.020
59 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you very much, Mr. Greenblatt. 

Thank you very much to all the witnesses. This may be the best 

I have ever seen four witnesses stick to the five minute clock. I 

don’t know whether we have got brighter lights or what, but thank 

you very much. 

We are going to move now to questions from the members. 

And again, I would remind all the members to limit your questions and the expected answer time to five minutes. The old filibuster for four minutes and 52 seconds and then ask a question— 

I am sorry, we will be gaveling that down. 

Okay. I will put myself on the clock, as well. 

I would like to start with Governor Pence. I may end with Governor Pence, too. 

I didn’t realize this—I don’t know how I missed it, and I am not 

surprised, but I have got a note here that says on your first day 

as governor you placed a moratorium on and began a review of 

state-level regulations. 

And then in November of 2014, Forbes Magazine identified Indiana as having one of the best regulatory environments in the country for starting a business and creating jobs. There is a little footnote I am looking at here. It says, ‘‘Indiana was ranking number 

three in 2014.’’ 

That is probably a misprint. I think it was probably—well, it 

couldn’t have been one because then you have got the whole—okay. 

But, Governor, as you know, here in Washington we are continuing the flood of regulations. The Unified Agenda is just out, 

and everybody understands that the administration is required 

twice a year to tell all of us what major regulations in the pipeline, 

and there is a bunch of them. 

So, could you please discuss your concerns regarding the administration’s regulatory what I think is excess, and to the extent to 

which it impedes economic expansion and job creation in Indiana. 

Governor PENCE. Well, thank you for the question, Chairman. 

And I have long believed that regulation is another form of taxation. The government can, in the form of taxation, appropriate 

money from an individual or a business in the form of direct taxation, or they can tell the business or the enterprise how to spend 

that money. In the same sense, there is a loss of control of those 

resources. 

So after I was elected governor we focused both on tax reduction 

in Indiana and reform, as well as regulatory reform. 

And I appreciate the chairman’s acknowledgement. We did sign 

a moratorium on any new state regulations and began the process 

of a full-scale look-back at Indiana’s regulatory policies with a real 

focus on ensuring that we are protecting the health and well-being 

and safety of Hoosier workers, and ensuring that environmental 

compliance takes place, but with an eye toward trying to cut red 

tape on businesses. 

And also, although you left it out, we also did pass the largest 

state tax cut in Indiana history in my first year. I think a combination of these things is why Indiana’s economy is growing, why we 

have added 100,000 net new jobs, why Indiana led the nation last 

year in manufacturing jobs created, and why in our state, as there 

is in the country, there is a renaissance in manufacturing, and I 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

60 

would say particularly in the Heartland that you and I call home, 

Mr. Chairman. 

But I think it does proceed out of a combination of common-sense 

regulatory policies. And I strongly urge members of this committee, 

whether it be regulatory policies coming out of the EPA pressing 

down on the cost of energy that is so vitally important in states 

like Indiana, or whether it be a broad range of other regulatory 

policies, that Washington, D.C., on an increasing basis, begin to see 

regulation simply as a form of taxation. 

And as we think about lessening the taxation burden, as there 

is talk in this city this year about tax reform to help get this economy growing even further, that we would also think very seriously 

about the kind of regulatory reform that is helping Indiana grow 

our economy. But that, I also believe, combined with really forward 

thinking about education and particularly about workforce education. 

The truth of the matter is in Indiana we do have a skills gap. 

Even when unemployment in Indiana was over 8 percent, I would, 

more often than not, visit businesses in our state that would say, 

‘‘We have jobs available. We just can’t find people with the background, the training, the industry-recognized certification to be 

able to fill those jobs.’’ 

And that is why in addition to tax reform and relief, in addition 

to regulatory relief, in Indiana we have really been focusing on redoubling our efforts to make career and vocational education a priority in every high school. 

I look forward in the course of the hearing to unpacking that further, but I think we are doing it differently in Indiana, and I think 

it accounts for our growth. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank you, Governor. And I am sure that we 

are going to get at some of those things. 

I was going to talk to you about the Western Governors University and your relationship there, but I can see my time is just 

about to expire. I did want to point out that Dr. Amiridis talked 

about a growing regulatory framework, as well, that is affecting 

higher education. 

So I yield back and recognize Mr. Scott. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Governor Pence, you indicated that each high school would have 

a career and vocational education component to it. Did I understand that right? 

Governor PENCE. Mr. Scott, in Indiana, what we have made as 

our goal is to make career—I call it career and vocational education—people in education know it better as career and technical 

education. But my aim is to make career and technical education 

a priority in every high school, and we are seeking to change the 

funding formula in Indiana to build on that commitment and encourage not only public resources but private resources to make 

that a reality. 

Mr. SCOTT. Now, some are concerned that this might be at the 

expense of academics. Would that be in addition to the academic 

standard and not at the expense of academics? 

Governor PENCE. Well, it is really a great question, and a more 

important point. Our aim is to make sure that every student who 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

61 

goes to school in Indiana graduates with what we call our Core 40 

college preparatory degree. 

We are talking about those electives that are on top of that, and 

making those more regionally relevant—allowing young people, in 

addition to being ready to go to college, giving them a chance to 

get the industry training, technical background, even industry certifications—in the event that they want to go to work right after 

high school as opposed to going on to some postsecondary right 

away. 

Mr. SCOTT. And the important point is that it is not at the expense of academics so you are not setting people aside to, when I 

was growing up, shop, or something like that, and you would graduate without the academic background and be burdened because of 

that for the rest of your life. You would make sure they have the 

full academics, and in addition to that, have job training where 

they can actually go and get a job? 

Governor PENCE. Well, that is exactly right. But I would commend to the attention of all the members of the committee a good, 

deep dive into career and technical education today. 

You know, in Indiana we are very strong in manufacturing, but 

also in life sciences, in logistics, in agriculture, and in high-tech. 

And we are talking about career training pathways in our high 

schools that would give people the kind of training to enter entrylevel positions in health care, entry-level positions in advanced 

manufacturing, and in agriculture. 

And so the idea here is much broader—you know, back in the 

day when I was going to high school you know, you and I are about 

the same age—we had industrial arts. I would tell you, career and 

technical educations today, where it is done right, is much broader, 

much more diverse, and opens up opportunities for good-paying 

jobs for young people as they step right out of high school. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Dr. Amiridis, you indicated—you mentioned research. Can you 

tell me what has happened to your research budget, and what has 

that done to the people who are doing the research? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. Thank you. Thank you for the question. 

Our research budget, both from federal and private sources, and 

a small percentage that come from the state of South Carolina, has 

been stable in the last few years. So we didn’t have significant consequences for people who are involved. 

The importance of the research budget, not only for the university but also for the surrounding area, is very significant because 

a lot of people are getting paid to do the work there. They are living within the local economy. They rent houses; they buy cars; they 

buy groceries, and so on. 

Other institutions have seen significant decreases. Fortunately, 

at the University of South Carolina, they have been stable. 

Mr. SCOTT. You mentioned also in your prepared remarks the 

need to make sure that financial aid was available to all students. 

What happens when that financial aid is not there? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. You made the point very well in your opening remarks that one of the issues that we are facing is the issue of debt. 

Some students are able to borrow money, and that increases when 

the financial aid is not there. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

62 

And statistics show that the student debt specifically increases 

when they don’t graduate in time, in years five and six, because 

the aid is not available or because they cannot maintain their 

grades. Some people, quite frankly, drop out of school, and that 

means that they lose a significant investment that they have made. 

So when the aid is not there, it is bad news for the student no 

matter what, whether they drop out of school or whether they increase the debt. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Mr. Greenblatt, you mentioned immigration reform. Did I understand from your comments, your testimony, that you support comprehensive immigration reform? And can you say what that would 

do to the economy? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Immigration reform is extremely important for 

our nation. We need more great talent to come into our country— 

chemists, engineers. We need people that are going to help run our 

factories, come up with great innovations, and create companies. 

The nation prospers with our immigrants. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Dr. Foxx, you are recognized. 

Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I want to thank our witnesses today. 

I didn’t know I would get a chance to make this great commercial 

today about regulations, but there is a terrific bill on the floor 

today called the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act, H.R. 50, which deals with improvements in UMRA, 

which was passed in 1995, that talks about the need for our having 

more transparency in regulations. And I want to commend it to all 

of you to look at and to encourage your senators when the bill 

passes the House today, and I hope that it will pass the House 

today. 

I particularly want to thank Governor Pence for being here. 

And, Governor Pence, I am sorry to have to do this to you, but 

I have to give you my comments on using the word ‘‘training,’’ because nobody comes into this group and talks about that word 

without hearing from me. The only thing I remember from my 

graduate work, getting my doctorate, seven years’ worth, is that 

you train dogs and you educate people. 

And I believe that if we want to enhance our attitudes toward 

career and technical education is that we use that phrase, ‘‘education,’’ and the phrase ‘‘workforce development.’’ So I would urge 

us to think about that. 

And I think that my colleague, Mr. Scott, talking about things 

being at the expense of academics—if we do education right, 

whether it is called career and vocational education or it is 4-year 

college education, we are not going to do anything at the expense 

of what we think of as academics, because when I talk to employers 

and all the research I see is people want folks who can read, write, 

and compute. That is the basics of academics. 

So thank you for letting me make those comments. 

I would like to ask Governor Pence, what other steps are you 

taking in Indiana to promote college affordability, including cutting 

costs on college campuses? How are these efforts working and how 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

63 

have they helped curtail tuition increases, because this is a big 

issue for this committee? 

Governor PENCE. Well, Congresswoman, thank you. Thank you 

for your strong views. I am accustomed to them with you for many 

years—and your candor. 

But let me agree strongly with what you said, on your first point. 

I like to say to people, I am not talking about a Plan A and a Plan 

B. In many ways, since the time that you and I finished high 

school we saw career education migrate on to postsecondary institutions. 

I am talking about two Plan A’s in our schools. I am talking 

about making sure that every student has the opportunity to get 

that foundational course if they are ready to go off to college, but 

also to have the opportunity to get the kind of education if they 

want to be prepared to begin on their own pathway of success in 

their career. 

But I agree with you very strongly. A lot of this for me—because 

I know there is talk of late, and there may be today, about community college funding. 

I think what is fresh about what Indiana is doing is we want to 

make career and technical education a priority in every high 

school. We want our high schools to work for all of our kids, regardless of where they want to start in life. 

But I agree with you that it is all about education. It is all about 

academics. And when you look at what career and technical education is today, opening up doorways of careers in life sciences and 

in careers far beyond the traditional areas that people think about, 

you couldn’t be more right. And Indiana intends to make that a reality. 

College affordability has been a real focus of ours. I will tell you 

that from the outset of our administration, we have been focused 

on requiring publicly supported colleges and universities in Indiana 

to be more effective partners with Hoosier families, particularly in 

the area of on-time completion. We have seen universities, like 

Purdue University, which has frozen tuition for students. 

But, you know, what I can tell you, as someone that has got two 

kids still in college and one who has bills still associated with college, all I know for sure is four years costs less than five years; 

three years costs less than four years. And we are demanding in 

Indiana that our universities and publicly-supported institutions 

provide degree mapping to students that are working students consistently toward the objective of finishing on time, with the aim toward lessening the burden that would be placed on them in the 

form of student loans. 

I also will tell you that we are very proud in Indiana of our financial aid programs that are available, particularly the 21st 

Scholars program that has been in place, and I’d be happy to talk 

about that. 

Chairman KLINE. Governor, the gentlelady’s time has expired. 

The filibuster trick worked for her. 

Ms. Fudge, you are recognized. 

Ms. FUDGE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you all for being here today. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

64 

Just for the record, let me just suggest that historically, the concept of states’ rights has never been very beneficial to poor people 

or people of color, so I would oppose just giving willy-nilly money 

to the states for education or for any other thing. 

And secondly, as it relates to accountability, there may, in fact, 

be too much paperwork; I don’t know. But I do know that there 

should be, certainly, some accountability for government and taxpayers’ money. 

And with that, let me just start my questioning with Mr. Mishel. 

Mr. Mishel, you wrote a paper called ‘‘Wage Stagnation in Nine 

Charts,’’ and you indicate that wage stagnation has not been created by economic trends, but rather by policy. Could you tell me 

what those policies are? 

Mr. MISHEL. Thank you very much. Well, the policies of omission 

and commission—policies that I believe have been taken on behalf 

of those with the most income power and wealth in our economy. 

So first and foremost, we have had excessive unemployment for 

30 years. We have people today calling for raising interest rates 

when, in fact, that would slow the recovery. We have policies which 

have blocked the ability of laws to be modernized to facilitate people’s access to collective bargaining. 

We have not kept the minimum wage value up. It fell remarkably in the 1980s, and still is 25 percent lower than what it was 

in 1968, when the productivity of the economy was half of what it 

is right now. 

We have trade policies which, in fact, have worked to lower people’s wages and erode jobs. 

Let me tell you some policies that have not been responsible. We 

hear a lot about regulation and taxes. You might not be surprised 

to know that we have an economy which has the highest profits in 

four decades and the highest after-tax profits in four decades. 

It is hard for me to see that the problem is that somehow business is not being able to make enough money. The question is, 

when they make that money—and more power to them—what are 

the policies that we are going to have that are going to make sure 

that as we have that kind of prosperity, it translates for everybody? 

Ms. FUDGE. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Amiridis, you talked about the rising cost of a college education being passed to students and their families through increased tuition. Can you please elaborate for me the importance of 

federal funding in higher education, particularly the Pell Grant 

program and the need to restore year-round Pell Grants? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. Thank you for the question. Let me clarify that a 

fraction of the cost has been passed to the students because the 

universities have also absorbed a significant fraction of the cost— 

Ms. FUDGE. Certainly. 

Mr. AMIRIDIS.—by increased efficiencies and by cuts that you 

have to implement, and I am talking about the public universities 

that I know much better. The Pell Grants are extremely important 

for students that come from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Without them, they don’t stand a chance of coming to college. 

When we are talking about graduating on time, avoiding debt accumulation, it is important to give to these students the flexibility 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

65 

that they need in order to succeed in this endeavor. And therefore, 

summer support for them is critical. 

This is exactly what we are doing in South Carolina with a yearround program, trying to give them opportunities to work during 

parts of the year and come back during the summer to school in 

order to be able to graduate on time. In the state of South Carolina, to its credit, the general assembly and the governor has supported us in taking the state scholarship program and extending it 

for the summer, as well. 

So I think it is very critical. The Pell Grants are very critical for 

a large number of our students, especially in a poor state like 

South Carolina. And year-round support for these students will accelerate their graduation rates on time. 

Ms. FUDGE. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank the gentlelady. 

Mr. Walberg, you are recognized. 

Mr. WALBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Governor, it is great to see you here. And as one who faithfully guards your northeast border and remains challenged with 

how to compete as a state, Michigan with Indiana, with some of the 

great things that you are doing, I believe your values, your moral 

clarity lead to a lot of great things for your citizens. And thank 

you, because that competition is good for Michigan to have, as well. 

I probably shouldn’t go here. I would love to talk further about 

career education. But, I would give you reinforcements for Dr. 

Foxx. King Solomon said, ‘‘Train up a child in the way they should 

go,’’ so there is training there. 

But I also don’t have the courage, but some wisdom, to not go 

after Dr. Foxx, so— 

Governor PENCE. I am going to leave you alone on that, Congressman. 

Mr. WALBERG.—I am going to use the word ‘‘education’’ today. 

I do want to talk about something a little different from career 

education. Today, one out of every three workers needs a state-approved license, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. It is amazing the President, in his most recent budget, is 

also talking of some of the concerns addressed there. 

The report highlighted that state-based occupational licensure is 

a powerful drag on employment and the economy because they act 

as barriers into job markets that otherwise would be accessible to 

individuals with low skills, little experience and education, or entrepreneurs with limited capital. 

As governor, you have explored Indiana’s licensure policies. I 

guess I would ask that as a question: Have you explored and to 

what level have you explored licensure policies and whether reforms are needed in your state and, significantly, other states, as 

well, to watch and guard against those impediments to jobs and 

employment? 

Governor PENCE. Well, thank you, Congressman. And I would 

tell you, it has been an issue of our administration from the outset. 

We are in our second, what we call long session of our general assembly. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

66 

Our budget session happens every two years, but in my first long 

session two years ago we proffered legislation that would reform 

our licensing process. And we continue to work in that category. 

I can appreciate two aspects of this. Number one is, I do believe 

that—and that statistic speaks for itself, that one in three requires 

some licensing— 

Mr. WALBERG. It used to be one in 20. 

Governor PENCE. And I think we need to think very carefully as 

a state, and I encourage national policy leaders to think about this 

as a nation, about when licensing, which presumably exists for the 

purpose of protecting the public, identifying men and women who 

have the background and the experience to be in the occupation 

that they are in—but when that, in fact, becomes a barrier to entry 

for people into a particular profession. 

In the state of Indiana we have taken up that issue. We are in 

consultation with our general assembly in this session on it, as 

well. 

But I stipulate that—your point that while I think in many professions licensing can be a great service to the public, so that people can know and understand—I do find myself more drawn to the 

principle of associations and private associations having the ability 

to certify and recognize, in some cases, people within their profession that they recognize. That would serve the public interest without adding another layer of bureaucracy or additional barriers to 

entry. 

But it is an issue we are working on. I would say it is a work 

in progress in Indiana, but it is very much on our radar screen. 

Mr. WALBERG. I appreciate that. 

Mr. Greenblatt, as a former steelworker myself and a son of a 

machinist tool and die maker I identify with your concerns of being 

a manufacturer that is going forward aggressively, that is achieving, but now you need help. Let me ask you this question: How do 

we raise the profile and respect of vocational skills education so 

that it is seen as academic as well as vocational? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Dollars. Money. 

The average American manufacturing worker makes over $70,000 a year. Over 95 percent of us pay health insurance. We 

have generous vacation, 401(k) plans, in general. 

Mr. WALBERG. How do we communicate that better, then, so that 

people understand that? 

Chairman KLINE. The gentleman’s time has expired. Yes, I know 

you were trying to do that. 

Mr. Sablan. 

Mr. SABLAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. At this time 

I yield my five minutes to Mr. Polis. 

Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman, Mr. Sablan. 

Question for Dr. Mishel: You mentioned, of course, the 74 percent 

rise in productivity. That is great news, right? I mean, we love productivity to go up. 

Now, there are different stakeholders, and what it sounds like is 

a disproportionate share of that has gone to stakeholders other 

than workers. And so I want to focus in on that a little bit. 

There is management. There are shareholders—sometimes they 

get productivity gains through dividends or share buybacks. There 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

67 

are corporate reserves—sometimes the money just sits there. There 

are consumers. That is a fairly egalitarian way to distribute productivity gains, because it is lowering prices. 

I am wondering if you have any information on who is benefiting 

disproportionately from these productivity gains. Is it management, 

shareholders, corporate reserves, consumers, other stakeholders? 

Clearly it is not the workers. 

Mr. MISHEL. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Polis. 

The gains from productivity have accrued an extraordinary 

amount to the top 1 percent of wage earners, and of income households. That comes because of— 

Mr. POLIS. So the top 1 percent of wage earners would generally 

mean management, presumably— 

Mr. MISHEL. Yes. Around 40 percent of the top 1 percent would 

be executives and managers. 

Another big chunk are those in the financial sector, which has 

been a sector which has expanded dramatically over the last 30 

years and whose pay relative to everybody else has expanded dramatically over the last 30 years so that the—what has fueled the 

growth of the top 1 percent of income has primarily been the extraordinary growth of executive pay and in the financial sector. 

The wages of a typical worker, as I testified, only rose around 9 

percent, even though productivity grew by 74 percent. 

Mr. POLIS. So a disproportionate amount for executive management, the top 1 percent of wage earners. Also—I am trying to further read into your comments—it sounds like consumers and perhaps shareholders have also not proportionately benefited from the 

productivity gains. Would you go so far as to say that? 

Mr. MISHEL. No. I would say that, you know, as I indicated earlier, we see the highest profits in four decades. So the productivity 

that we have reaped has been being paid out in profits, some of 

that gets paid out in dividends. We also know the stock market is 

extraordinarily high. 

So we have an economy that is unusual in that we have really 

a lot of excess capacity. Unemployment is too high; we all agree on 

that. 

And somehow the businesses are very profitable, the people at 

the top are doing very well, but nearly everybody else is not seeing 

much income growth at all. 

Mr. POLIS. I would encourage us to look at productivity gains 

being passed along to consumers, as well. That is also very—it is 

an egalitarianizing influence, and policies that promote consumers 

as stakeholders should be very important. 

Want to go to Mr. Greenblatt real quickly. 

You mentioned health care and the Affordable Care Act, and in 

particular you mentioned two taxes that you are worried about 

with regard to manufacturing: the Cadillac—so-called Cadillac tax 

and medical device tax. And I just wanted to see—and obviously 

when you are talking to people who don’t support the Affordable 

Care Act their answer is simply, ‘‘Repeal the Affordable Care Act.’’ 

I support the Affordable Care Act. However, like many Democrats, I am happy to have a discussion about different ways of paying for it. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

68 

So my question to you is—of course, happy to talk about those 

particular ways of paying for it—do you have other proposals to replace that revenue if we were to modify or eliminate those particular taxes? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Just so you know, from our perspective, I have 

been—since I bought the company—giving health insurance to our 

team, and we have a very generous plan. They are on the same 

plan I am. My kids have the same plan as my workers. 

And it has typically gone up 8 to 12 percent a year. The last two 

years it has gone up over 50 percent each year. That is devastating 

because I can’t pass on 50 percent to my competition in China and 

Canada, they don’t have that— 

Mr. POLIS. Well, to be clear, the Cadillac tax has not, as far as 

I know, hasn’t started yet, so it is not—it can’t be— 

Mr. GREENBLATT. I am just saying our premiums and what our 

employees are feeling, what Marlin is feeling, and what factories 

in general are feeling are massive increases over the last two years. 

And it makes it more difficult to retain great talent and hire more 

talent when our costs are going up. 

The best way to improve the health care delivery system in our 

country is to give us competition. Right now I am forced to buy 

from a handful of companies in Maryland State. I would love to be 

able to buy from Nebraska, or Virginia, or whomever has a good 

plan. 

Right now I am forced to buy from a very small cartel, and that 

is un-American. So, you know, I can buy steel— 

Mr. POLIS. So, reclaiming my time— 

Mr. GREENBLATT.—from anywhere in the world. I happen to buy 

it from Indiana, the new— 

Chairman KLINE. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Russell, you are recognized. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, gentlemen, for being here today. 

Governor, it is very exciting to hear the types of policies that 

have been working. 

I am a small business owner—a small rifle manufacturer—and 

I have a question for Dr. Mishel. Have you run a business or managed a workforce within a business, sir? 

Mr. MISHEL. Well, in fact, I have 40 employees and I come from 

a family where everybody worked in a small business. My father 

was a small business man himself and a proud Republican. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Well, that is good to know. 

And, Mr. Greenblatt, when regulations, fees, and taxes are imposed on businesses, do you think that they absorb that or do they 

pass that on to the pricing of their products towards consumers? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Two things occur. Number one, you have to 

raise the prices and you become less competitive and lose the job, 

or you take it—it is a very challenging thing and it really hurts 

American factories. 

Mr. RUSSELL. And so would you say, then, that as regulation and 

forced things like we have seen mentioned here in the testimony 

today—higher minimum wages over time, collective bargaining, 

forced arbitration, modernization of labor standards—if all of those 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

69 

things are imposed on you, which class of people do you think are 

hurt most by such policies: upper class, middle class, lower class? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. I think that hurts working people the most because we have to be competitive. We are competing with China, 

Germany, and Canada, and the only way to be competitive is to 

have a nimble workforce that doesn’t have workforce rules, that 

can adjust to whatever is happening in the economy. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. Greenblatt, when you see businesses that have 

surplus, are they generous with that? Do they get involved with the 

community and outreach, even a small business such as your own, 

or is that pocketed as part of the 1 percent? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Typically, profits are used as the feedstock so 

that we can weather recessions, so that we can give bonuses to our 

employees, so we can pay for education for our team. Matter of 

fact, at our company we pay 100 percent of everybody’s college education, associate degree education, or master’s degree. 

Mr. RUSSELL. And you had mentioned that six of your 30 employees are mechanical engineers, which is very admirable, and it 

shows your strong productivity with such a small workforce. I am 

guessing they are paid higher than minimum wage to attract competitive people to work for you? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Our lowest-paid person is paid three times 

more than minimum wage, and they typically rise very quickly. 

They start off at minimum wage—I am sorry, they start off at like 

$15 an hour, but as they learn more skills they grow. Typical manufacturing employee is paid over $70,000 a year. 

Mr. RUSSELL. And so you, sir, as a business owner, then, if you 

want to remain competitive, you have to provide competitive wages 

or you would lose that skilled workforce? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Absolutely. You have to pay very well so that 

you can retain and attract great talent. 

Mr. RUSSELL. And to you first, sir, and then anyone who would 

like to answer, what—particularly on manufacturing, would be the 

impact of excise taxes, where you are taxed just for the privilege 

of having made something, in addition to the end-of-year business 

profits and then your personal taxes? Can you explain a little bit 

about the impact of just the privilege of having made something 

getting hit with excise taxes on U.S. manufacturing? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. These taxes and regulations are very cumulative, and they weigh on manufacturing. For example, in my company we pay over 40 percent in taxes. I compete with Canadian 

companies that make similar things that I do; they pay 15 percent 

in taxes. We are at a massive disadvantage. 

If you want to grow American manufacturing jobs in Baltimore 

City, the best way to do it is to lower the burden so we can hire 

more talent, we will be more price competitive, we will win more 

jobs, we will hire more people, we will end unemployment. 

Mr. RUSSELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back my time. 

Chairman KLINE. Gentleman yields back. 

Ms. Wilson, you are recognized? 

Ms. WILSON of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the Ranking Member, for holding this hearing on this important issue. 

Since coming to Congress, I have urged Congress to make its priority a jobs-first agenda. When we invest in our people by proCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

70 

viding an opportunity to earn a living wage then they are able to 

provide for their families and pay taxes. That is how we improve 

our success as a nation. 

The President has made remarkable progress over the last six 

years reviving a struggling economy, including 58 consecutive 

months of private sector job growth. 

Despite significant economic progress, many families are finding 

that they are simply unable to make ends meet. Nearly 11.2 million remain unemployed; millions more are underemployed or have 

given up looking for work. 

According to a recent report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research, African-Americans who have earned much higher average levels of education over recent decades have lower chances of 

earning a living wage today than they had 30 years ago. Today, a 

parent working full time at minimum wage will simply not earn 

enough income to cover basic needs like food, clothing, and shelter. 

It is mathematically impossible. 

Working families are the backbone of this country. When we give 

working families the opportunity to earn a well-deserved living 

wage, paid sick leave, and overtime pay, we keep our country moving forward. 

Thank you for testifying today, Dr. Mishel. I wanted to ask you 

to expand on your comments about sick leave and paid family 

leave. We know that these are particularly important policies for 

working families. 

Would you comment on how many workers today do not have 

sick leave in this country? Could you also talk about how we in 

America compare to other countries in regards to modernizing 

labor protections like sick leave and paid family leave? 

Mr. MISHEL. Well, thank you very much for your question. I don’t 

have the specific numbers in front of me, but I think everybody 

knows that the United States provides less ability to get paid leave 

for sick leave, for family leave, than almost any other advanced 

country and even many developing countries. 

The people who don’t have access are, in fact, those people with, 

you know, working-class jobs. Those who are white-collar are more 

likely to be able to get those. 

So what we really have is a problem of those with the least not 

really being able to do what they, you know, to be able to balance 

work and family. And that keeps women out of jobs; that hurts 

families. 

We need to make sure that everybody is able to do that, and it 

is part of modernizing our standards. 

Cities and states are starting to do it. We have three states that 

have paid sick leave, and I haven’t seen all the businesses go out 

of business there. 

Ms. WILSON of Florida. Doctor, you mentioned decreased funding 

for instruction at the state level and for research at the federal 

agency level. Can you discuss the importance of federal research 

funding for your university? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. Thank you for the question, Ms. Wilson. 

It is extremely important for the public research universities to 

be able to compete. And we are not asking for federal funds to be 

given to us; we are asking for funds that are available for the uniCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

71 

versities to compete with new ideas in order to advance science and 

technology. 

We have seen what this has done for this country, how this country has been a technological leader for the last few decades, and 

we need to remember that this was not always the case. It was not 

the case at the beginning of the 20th Century, for example, and we 

have seen how the universities have contributed to the advancement of technology and science in this country, with direct effects 

on industry and manufacturing eventually. 

I am concerned, as many are at the university level that decreased federal funding for research and development, especially 

academic research, is creating a deficit with other countries that 

they have stepped in and they have provided significant research 

funding, and eventually we will have to pay the price or we lose 

the technological advancement worldwide. 

So I think it is extremely important for my university and for all 

research universities. 

Ms. WILSON of Florida. Thank you. 

Mr. Greenblatt, would comprehensive, bipartisan immigration reform help the economy? You know that the Senate has taken up 

a bipartisan immigration reform bill. Do you think the House 

should follow suit and take up immigration reform, as well? 

Chairman KLINE. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

Mr. Grothman, you are up. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. I want to talk a little bit to Governor Pence. 

Glad you are here. We heard a comment a little while ago kind 

of denigrating shop classes, and first of all, I didn’t really like it. 

I mean, on behalf of so many of the people in the state of Wisconsin, I detected a little bit of careerism there, kind of implying 

that some training is better than others, and I really didn’t care 

for that. 

But are there jobs available in Indiana? I mean, we always talk 

about, you know, the number of people who are unemployed, but, 

first of all, Indiana and Wisconsin are the two biggest manufacturing states in the country, percentage-wise, so we have something in common. 

Governor PENCE. Indiana is number one. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Right now, right? Right? It goes back and forth. 

In any event, do you have job openings in Indiana? 

Governor PENCE. Yes, we do, Congressman, most certainly. And 

we are working every day to close the skills gap with adult workforce initiatives in Indiana. 

But what we want to do in the Hoosier State that is really new 

is we want to make sure our high schools work just as well for our 

kids that want to start their career as our kids that want to start 

off in college, and that is why we have made it our aim to make 

career and technical and vocational education a priority in every 

high school. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Do you have any idea how many jobs are advertised or job openings there are? Do you have any anecdotal evidence from your businesses as to whether they could expand if they 

could find the workers? 

Governor PENCE. I can get you the updated information. Last 

year, in the state of Indiana, we actually added about a little more 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

72 

than 25,000 jobs in the manufacturing sector. We have seen our 

workforce grow in the last year by more than 50,000 in Indiana. 

But at 5.8 percent unemployment, I can assure you, as I travel 

across the state of Indiana, there are still positions in our state in 

a broad range of industries—not simply manufacturing, but in life 

sciences, in health care, and in insurance—that are going unfilled 

today because people can’t find individuals with the background 

and the training to fill them. So there are jobs available and we 

are trying to close that skills gap every day in Indiana. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. 

One quick question for Dr. Mishel. My experience in Wisconsin 

is similar to Governor Pence’s. When I go around I think maybe 

the—I don’t know if it is the number one, but probably the number 

one problem for most of my employers is they can’t find people to 

work. 

You kind of dismiss the skills gap, and I wondered exactly, particularly in manufacturing, who you are talking to that you feel 

that is not a major problem. And I look at it from both ends. Obviously I was a state legislator in Madison; I see so many college 

graduates not getting jobs that you would expect for a college degree. And again and again and again I find business owners who 

complain they can’t find anybody to work, despite this unemployment problem. 

And it concerned me a little bit that somebody in your position 

kind of was dismissive on the skills gap. I mean, do you get out 

there and talk to business owners, particularly to, say, Mr. 

Greenblatt next to you, on this idea that the skills gap isn’t a 

major, major cause for concern? 

Mr. MISHEL. I would draw my conclusions based on two things. 

One, as an economist, when you hear the idea of a shortage you 

would look for evidence that the wages being offered by employers 

keep on getting ratcheted up, and therefore, not able to find work— 

the appropriate workers. What we see across the board, and not in 

just maybe a few occupations, but across the board we don’t see 

wages rising very much at all, so it is hard to see the employers 

bidding up. 

Secondly, I commissioned work by two MIT professors, Paul 

Osterman and Andrew Weaver. We published their work last year. 

They did a survey of manufacturers, and they found that nearly 65 

percent of establishments report that they have no vacancies whatsoever, and 76 percent report they had no long-term vacancies—in 

other words, jobs which have remained unfilled for three months 

or more. 

Only 16 percent responded affirmatively when asked whether 

they, quote—‘‘Lacked—lack of access to skilled workers is a major 

obstacle to increased financial success.’’ 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Do I have about one second left here? 

Chairman KLINE. You have 14 seconds. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Well, Mr. Greenblatt? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. That is not the experience of most factories. 

Skills shortage is a huge problem. We have over 600,000 jobs that 

we could get hired in today—machinists, welders—it is awful out 

there, and our experience is that this is holding back our growth, 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

73 

this is holding back employment. When you hire the skilled talent 

what happens is then other people need to be hired around them. 

So we need our school systems to start creating talent so that we 

could hire these people and get the economy really going again. 

Chairman KLINE. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. Bonamici. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, to the witnesses, for testifying today. 

I am very glad we are having a hearing about expanding opportunities in America’s schools and workplaces. I do join Ranking 

Member Scott to say that I am disappointed that we aren’t having 

a hearing about the expanded opportunities in America’s schools 

that would come from a good, bipartisan reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

Today’s hearing is just a day after the unveiling of a major rewrite of the ESEA, and apparently just a week before that bill will 

be marked up and rushed to the floor. And with all due respect, 

it is truly unfortunate that my colleagues and I and many new 

members of the committee don’t have the opportunity to hear leaders and stakeholders testify about what is a very important reauthorization. 

We should be listening to experts, having their input inform decisions about the details about the ESEA, especially given the magnitude of the law. Now, clearly my colleagues and I wanted to replace No Child Left Behind with provisions that are less rigid and 

prescriptive, but the process has lacked transparency and the kind 

of open dialogue that can yield consensus. 

Hearings show our constituents that we are serious about 

crafting policies that incorporate new evidence and thoughtful feedback, and the American public deserves an open process, deserves 

to see their policymakers wrestling with challenging questions. And 

without transparency and the assurance that many voices will be 

heard, it is harder for students, families, and educators to have 

confidence in the process. 

Now, I know about the ambitious timeline, but something this 

important deserves a thorough and open process, so I hope that the 

committee will reconsider and hold hearings on the ESEA reauthorization. 

And now I want to follow up on the CTE discussion, career and 

technical education discussion. I am not going to call it training, 

even though Ms. Foxx is no longer here. 

Now, I have found over the years that many of these courses 

have been eliminated, either because of budget concerns or because 

they aren’t tested, and the high stakes that are associated with the 

courses that are testing. And they are very important, hands-on 

learning opportunities. Mr. Greenblatt recognized that. 

Governor Pence, you did, as well. 

And in my school tours I have seen things like fabrication labs, 

with CAD software and 3D printing; I have seen a girls-only welding class that has a waiting list to get in. 

And I want to especially ask you, Mr. Greenblatt, you talk about 

innovation and employees who can help drive innovation. Your goal 

number two, in fact: Manufacturers in the U.S. will be world-leading innovators. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

74 

So I have spoken with companies like Intel, the largest private 

employer in my district, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin about how 

do we educate a generation of innovative workers, especially since 

a lot of these creative opportunities have been cut? So we need 

skilled workers, but we also need people who can think outside of 

the box. 

So how can education support the need for innovative workers, 

not just good test-takers? 

Mr. Greenblatt, what are your thoughts? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Creativity is critical. When we interview our 

engineers, we are looking for ones that can think outside the box 

and not do exactly what they are told. We are not looking for people with just book-smarts. 

The people that do well in our company are the ones that are not 

just rigid; they are innovative. So we welcome that, and we compensate them and give them bonus checks if they come up with 

slick ideas, and we welcome and embrace that kind of input. And 

I think that should be a model that all companies follow. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Terrific. We have a lot of opportunity with ESEA 

policy to help drive creative education. 

I am going to ask Dr. Amiridis if you want to comment briefly 

on that, but I also want to ask you to talk about—of course, the 

rising costs of higher education concerns many, and you mentioned 

that. But you also mentioned that your university has modified its 

financial aid program to support students during the summer. So 

can you explain how year-round Pell Grants would support the efforts at your university and help accelerate the time to degree? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. I cannot pass the opportunity to add, in terms of 

the question how do you educate innovators, and Plutarch, in the 

first century A.D., said that the mind is not a vessel to be filled, 

but it is a fire to be kindled. You light fires one at a time and you 

light fires by combining curricular and extracurricular activities, by 

advising and mentoring students, and by helping them to learn 

how to think outside of the box. 

It is not the university that reorganized its scholarship program; 

it is the state of South Carolina, actually, with full bipartisan support from the general assembly and from the governor’s office. And 

it is extremely important, I believe, in order to give, again, the 

flexibility to the students to be able to do the things that they need 

to do to develop these job skills and this innovative spirit and graduate on time. 

That is why I think Pell Grants for the summer period are important, because it will give the federal component of what we are 

already providing in the state. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much. 

I see my time is expired. I yield back. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentlelady. 

Mr. Thompson, you are recognized. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Chairman. 

Governor, great to see you. 

Governor PENCE. Great to see you, Congressman. 

Mr. THOMPSON. My pleasure. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

75 

I wanted to really focus on an area of passion of mine, which is 

career and technical education. Having served now for a number of 

terms as co-chair of that caucus, and I believe we need a strong 

partnership, obviously, with our state capitals. You know, a lot of 

the really necessary work is going to occur there, but we have to 

show some leadership here, as well, in Washington with career and 

technical education. 

In fact, in October—late October—I hosted a career and technical 

education hearing at our state capital in Pennsylvania. It was bipartisan, and we actually had members of the state legislature that 

joined us. It was rather unique. 

And we had great witnesses. We had a witness from a labor 

union, who talked about the hundreds of thousands of jobs that are 

open and will be open that we just cannot find qualified and 

trained workers, or employers struggle to, you know, to be able to 

fill. 

And I apologize. I stepped out because I just had a briefing with 

our trade representative Michael Froman, as we, you know, work 

on TTIP, and TPP, and in my mind, one of the things that is necessary with trade agreements is we need a robust career and technical education program to ensure America’s competitiveness with 

these. 

We are going to increase trade, we want to make sure that, you 

know, from a purely selfish perspective, that we are moving more 

trade, more products, agriculture, commodities, to other countries. 

But if we don’t have that qualified and trained workforce, you 

know, we are not going to ultimately be as successful with any of 

the trade agreements. I think it goes hand in hand. 

And so I wanted to get your perspective because I know that is 

something that you have been very supportive of, and I really just 

wanted to ask your perspective, in terms of CTE and what do you 

see as good models? What do we need to do? 

Governor PENCE. Well, first, Congressman, thanks for your leadership in the caucus on this issue and for helping to bring it to 

such a national focus. I commend you for that. 

I will tell you, it is our intention that Indiana would be the first 

state in America to make career and technical education a priority 

in every high school again. 

And I remember my days in Congress. There aren’t too many 

things that passed unanimously, other than naming post offices. 

But I can tell you that the legislation that we moved to create a 

statewide career council and then 11 different regional works councils to rethink high school curriculum on a regional basis for career 

and technical education passed our general assembly unanimously—two different pieces of legislation, and was cosponsored by 

the Republican and Democrat leadership of the House and the Senate in Indianapolis. I mean, this is an idea whose time has come. 

And I would just say to you two things that may inform your 

leadership on this and your thinking on this. Number one is, I just 

urge the Congress—there is so much focus in this area, as you 

know, there have been headlines of late about community college. 

For decades we have talked about career education as postsecondary education. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

76 

Let me say again, in Indiana, where we are innovating is we 

want to make career and technical education a priority in our high 

schools again. I am somebody that believes that all honest work is 

honorable, and our high schools ought to work just as well for our 

kids that want to get a job as for our kids that want to immediately 

go off and get a degree. 

So that is ‘‘A.’’ I would just encourage policymakers here in 

Washington to think of ways to give states greater flexibility to innovate in secondary education. 

The second thing is I would just encourage you with a word. I 

think many states are ready to go in this space; there is a manufacturing renaissance underway, and there is a skills gap. 

And there is a recognition, I cite our former colleague, Mary 

Fallin, now Governor Mary Fallin, who made this issue her top priority when she served as chairman of the National Governors Association a year ago. And I can tell you, in bipartisan gatherings 

among governors, where, just like in Congress, there is the occasional disagreement, there is not much disagreement on this issue. 

And so I would just urge you on, both in your role in the caucus 

and here on this committee, to do all you can to empower states 

with not only greater resources, as they are appropriate, but more 

importantly, greater flexibility and the encouragement to think 

about making career and vocational education a priority in every 

high school again. I do believe it can have a transformative effect 

on the future of our kids, their opportunities, and, of course, our 

economy. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Governor. 

Thank you, Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank the gentleman. His time is expired. 

Mr. Pocan. 

Mr. POCAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, to the panelists, for being here today. 

I would like to try to get into two areas, at least if I can, on education and also on productivity—the dichotomy between productivity increases and declining wages. Let me start with education, 

if I can. 

And nice to meet you, Governor Pence. 

Wisconsin is a state, like Indiana, that has been one of the early 

adapters to the experiment of taxpayer-funded vouchers. Unfortunately, in Wisconsin we haven’t had very good success in this area. 

In fact, recently they did a test of the scores of the kids in those 

taxpayer-funded voucher schools versus the public schools in reading and math, and they are significantly less in some areas in performance in those schools. 

But one of the other things we found is that a large percent of 

the people—the kids getting the money to go to those private 

schools already are attending those private schools. In the last expansion we did in Wisconsin, 79 percent of the people who got the 

vouchers were already attending that school, so it wasn’t really 

anything about improving the public schools. And I know that—I 

think there was a study in Indiana that said about 40 percent, so 

not as much as 79 percent, but are already attending a private 

school. Can you just share with me a little bit the thought behind 

how investing—how you improve your public schools by giving the 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

77 

taxpayer dollars to people who are already attending other schools, 

how that helps to improve public schools? 

Governor PENCE. Well, number one, thank you for the question 

and the thoughtful nature of your comments. 

With all due respect to Wisconsin, we think school choice was 

kind of born in Indiana. And what may affect those numbers you 

are referring to is Indianapolis was actually home to the very first 

privately funded educational scholarship program in America. Virtually every major city in the country today now has a scholarship 

program for underprivileged kids. 

In the early 1990s we had a local executive by the name of J. 

Patrick Rooney, now deceased, who privately funded 50 percent 

scholarships for disadvantaged kids to attend private schools, and 

I would be happy to drill down on that data, but I expect that may 

have contributed to some of the underlying statistics you referred 

to. 

I just simply believe that competition makes everybody better, 

and that allowing parents to choose to send their child to a different public school, to a different public charter school, or in the 

case of disadvantaged kids, to allow them, if they so desire, to send 

their child to a private school. It actually improves educational outcomes overall. 

I mean, I have been married to a school teacher. She spent half 

her career in public school, half in a private school, and I really do 

believe there is nothing that ails our schools in this country that 

can’t be fixed if you give parents more choices and teachers more 

freedom to— 

Mr. POCAN. If I can just take off right on that too, because in 

Wisconsin one of the questions we have had, too, is on the accountability. And if I understand it right, in Indiana the Department of 

Public Instruction isn’t allowed to audit the current program that 

you have, so how do you measure that accountability in those programs? 

I mean, when we first started ours we had all kinds of crazy 

things. We had money going to schools where the person who 

founded the school said he could read a book simply by placing his 

hand on the book; we had people buying Cadillacs. In fact, I think 

I understand there was a church in your area who said they took 

the money to improve their air conditioners and all these other 

things. 

How do we get that accountability on education—when we say 

we want to have competitiveness, because we want to try it as an 

experiment, but how do we get the accountability? 

Governor PENCE. Well, we have a strong accountability system in 

Indiana, an A to F system that was established a number of years 

ago. And four out of five of our voucher students in Indiana attend 

A- or B-rated schools in our state. And I do think accountability is 

important. 

I would like to see more flexibility from the federal government 

on accountability. When I was in the Congress many years ago, I 

was one of a handful in my party that opposed No Child Left Behind when it came to the floor in 2001 because I believe that education is a state and local function. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

78 

And I would continue to reflect that to my former colleagues and 

to leaders in both parties. My hope is that Washington will provide 

resources, not red tape, give states flexibility, because I think Indiana is emblematic of a program where we have expanded innovation, we have strong accountability, and we are seeing educational 

and, more importantly, student achievement improve as a result. 

Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chairman, I saw the yellow light come up a 

while ago. I am going to yield back because I know you like that. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. You get extra gold 

stars for that, which are of no value, of course, but you can have 

them. 

Mr. Allen. 

Mr. ALLEN. Yes, sir. 

And I want to thank the panel, too, for being here. 

And, Governor, thank you for all the efforts that you are making 

there in Indiana on education. And, of course, one of the things 

that I have talked to some college presidents the last couple of 

days, and I know our own governor in Georgia, but the federal government has a habit of making the assumption that the states 

don’t know how to deal with educating our students. And then, of 

course, the states and the local boards have some conflicts, as well. 

How in the world do we eliminate that—I mean, get everybody 

on the same page? In other words, the federal government needs 

to understand its role, the state needs to understand its role, and 

the local boards need to understand their role. 

You know, I would prefer to give it to the local boards and have 

a bottom-up style, versus a one-size-fits-all style. Have you seen 

any models in your state that, from the local board standpoint up 

through the state, and models that even the federal government 

can say, ‘‘Hey, let’s leave those folks alone and let them do what 

they are doing?’’ 

Governor PENCE. Well, we are very proud of our record in Indiana, and the policies—curriculum policies, textbook policies—are 

established at the local level and driven by parents and administrators in local communities, and that is as it should be. 

But let me strongly agree, Congressman, with your assertion. I 

think education is a state and local function, and the role of the 

federal government ought to be only that which may provide resources, catalyze innovation, that are in the broader national interest. 

But I believe that whether it is standards, whether it is curriculum, whether it is textbooks, that those ought to be decided and 

those decisions resolved at the state and, more preferably, the local 

level. And we have sought to emulate that in Indiana. 

And I really do believe that as the Congress takes up legislation 

in this area, that placing real emphasis on giving states additional 

flexibility to innovate—I mean, we are proud of our record in Indiana. We are proud of our record in traditional K–12 education; public charter schools; our voucher program, now the largest in the 

country; our focus on expanding and being the first state in America to make career and vocational education a priority in every 

high school. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

79 

And frankly, as I talk to colleagues around the country, I have 

a lot of inquiry about Indiana’s education policies. And, as the old 

book says, iron sharpens iron. 

And I would just encourage the leadership here in the Congress 

to think about how we can catalyze state-based innovation and reform in education, and then you will see the best ideas identified 

because you will see student achievement resulting from that. We 

are seeing that in Indiana. Test scores are up; graduation rates are 

up; second-best improvement in the Nation’s Report Card. 

And I do think that competitive federalism is especially important in this area in the life of our nation today, and I would encourage you to look for ways to restore the flexibility to state and local 

governments in this area. 

Mr. ALLEN. You know, my mom and dad were educators and, of 

course, we sat around the kitchen table at night—you know, my 

dad says, ‘‘You give me a better student and I will give you a better 

education system,’’ and, you know, some students are motivated, 

others aren’t. 

And, you know, in states we compete for manufacturers. We compete like crazy for manufacturing jobs. Yet, the number one decision with manufacturers is, do I have a skilled workforce? 

I mean, as far as a skilled workforce—Mr. Greenblatt, I want you 

to comment on this, as well—how do we motivate these students 

to get the kind of education they need to fulfill the jobs of the future with where we are going in manufacturing today? 

Governor PENCE. Well, I think, you know, for me education always should be—and I didn’t know I would leave today with a Plutarch quote, but I am glad I did. That was really powerful. 

For me, education should always be about letting young people 

discover their God-given abilities and to develop those, and when 

they find those abilities and passions, everything else about their 

academic life will get better, as well. And that is why we are seeking to make career and technical education a priority in every high 

school. 

I am absolutely confident not only will it result in students graduating with the background and training to be able to get good 

jobs, but I know it will increase our graduation rates, it will increase their passion for education, and it will kindle a fire in their 

hearts and minds for a broader future. 

Chairman KLINE. Sorry, the gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Hinojosa? 

Mr. HINOJOSA. I want to join Chairman Kline and Ranking Member Scott in expressing our best wishes to my friend, Congressman 

Roe. I will keep his family in my thoughts and prayers and hope 

that he will soon be able to return to Congress. 

While our economy has come a long way since the Great Recession, starting back in 2008, wages for middle-class and workingclass families have remained stagnant. I was in the Congress in 

1998, when we were able to raise the minimum wage. 

That was 16 years ago. Just take the inflation rate and see what 

today’s rate—minimum wage is and how it hurts many working 

families. 

I am also concerned that the United States has also failed to provide all students with equitable access to a high-quality education. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

80 

In my view, this committee must ensure that all Americans, not 

just the wealthy 1 percent, are benefiting from our current economy’s growth. 

I want to go to the first question to Dr. Mishel. 

In your testimony you indicate that in 2012 the top 10 percent 

captured 48 percent of the market income, exacerbating income inequality for millions of Americans. Can you tell us shortly, just 

briefly, how raising the federal minimum wage, would improve the 

lives of Americans and strengthen our economy? 

Mr. MISHEL. Thank you for the question. 

The answer is that the minimum wage essentially sets the wage 

for the bottom fifth of workers. Those workers now earn substantially less than they did in 1968, even though the productivity of 

the economy has doubled and the workers in the bottom fifth have 

substantially more education than they had back in 1968. 

So raising their wages will actually improve, obviously, their 

lives and lives of their children and their ability. They will consume more. It is actually something that will help the economy. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you. 

Governor PENCE, I enjoyed serving with you while you served in 

Congress, and I will ask you one or two questions. 

Last year you refused an opportunity to receive up to $80 million 

in federal investment for preschool development grants in early 

childhood education for Indiana. I believe that would have helped 

2,000 children access pre-K. How are you planning to fund your 

pilot pre-K program that you mentioned? 

Governor PENCE. Well, first, allow me to reiterate that it was a 

great pleasure to serve with you in the Congress, and it is good to 

see you again, Congressman. 

Let me say, in the last two years, as governor of Indiana, I took 

time to travel across our state and learn about quality pre-K education. And I came to the conclusion that, first, I will always believe that the best pre-K education is a prosperous family that can 

provide the enrichment in the home that every child deserves. 

But over my first year in office, traveling around the state, I became convinced that we needed to open doors of opportunity to disadvantaged children in the state of Indiana for quality pre-K education. I took my case to the Indiana General Assembly in the year 

2014. 

Indiana was one of only a handful of states that made no investment in quality pre-K education. But I went to the legislature; I 

made it a priority in our administration. I thought it was important that we cross the threshold and we begin to open doors of opportunity to disadvantaged kids. 

Every child deserves to start school ready to learn, and quality 

pre-K education that can make up for what is lacking in the enrichment in the home, I believe, would be a great benefit to Hoosier 

kids— 

Mr. HINOJOSA. I am glad to hear you say— 

Governor PENCE. We worked for that—if I may, Congressman, 

we worked for that, we passed, through our legislative process, a 

pilot program. Five Indiana counties. We actually launched that 

program last month, and this fall we will have more than 1,000 

students in the pilot program. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

81 

And we are doing it the Indiana way. We are looking at it, we 

are opening doors for disadvantaged kids, we are studying it. 

And my aim was to keep faith with the objective of our legislature, to simply begin a program with our state dollars, which we 

will fully fund in the next two years at $10 million per year, and 

learn from that program and then explore ways that we can expand opportunities to more quality pre-K in the years ahead. That 

was the basis of our decision with regard to federal funding, and 

I stand by it. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Governor. 

Chairman KLINE. Gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Carter? 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you all for being here. We appreciate your presence 

here today. 

Mr. Greenblatt, like yourself, I am a small business owner. I own 

three independent retail pharmacies, and the last thing I ever want 

is people telling me how—and particularly the government—to run 

my business, and particularly how much I am supposed to be paying my employees. 

Now, like you, I have well-compensated employees, but I also 

have students that I use. Do you use any students in your business? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. No. We just hire full-time workers. 

Mr. CARTER. Okay. 

In my case, I use students, and if I were to—Dr. Mishel, if I were to be required to pay them $12.50, I wouldn’t be able to use them. 

Now, what is that going to do to that particular sector if the government does raise the minimum wage to $12.50? 

Mr. MISHEL. Well, we are talking about $12.50 in 2020, and 

there has been extensive study of raising the minimum wage across 

the states, and I don’t think it will actually adversely affect the employment of young workers whatsoever. 

There are provisions in the minimum wage legislation that actually let young workers get paid a little bit less than the minimum 

wage, but employers rarely even use it. And the reason is they 

don’t want to have people working side by side earning different 

wages. 

So I actually think the higher the wage, they will probably have 

more time for their studies, they will probably be able to work less, 

and they will be able to help their families more. 

Mr. GREENBLATT. The real minimum wage is zero. They won’t 

get hired. 

Mr. CARTER. That is exactly right, and I couldn’t agree with you 

more. 

And, Mr. Greenblatt, if I could, if I could expound on this a little 

bit more, you mentioned the Affordable Care Act and the impact it 

has had on your business, and I can attest to the impact it has had 

on my business, as well—increased premiums, costs that I have 

had to incur as an employer, and I am sure that is the same— 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Yes. 

Mr. CARTER.—experience that you have had. 

Mr. GREENBLATT. It is terrible. 

Mr. CARTER. It is. Thank you. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

82 

Governor Pence and Dr. Amiridis, while I served in the Georgia 

State Senate I had the honor and privilege of serving as the chair 

of higher-ed, and one of the concerns that we had in the state of 

Georgia was increasing the number of college graduates and certificate holders, because we recognized the fact that in the coming 

years they are going to—the jobs that are going to be available are 

going to be available to that particular group. 

One of our initiatives has been Complete College Georgia, and 

that is to get people—Dr. Amiridis, as you mentioned earlier—who 

have some college to go back and to finish their degrees. Have you 

had any experience in Indiana or South Carolina where you have 

dealt with this and something that has been successful? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. The program that is in my testimony, Congressman Carter, is exactly about this. Palmetto College, which is a 

statewide program that we started online, is focusing on degree 

completion. People who have done two years either at the university, community college, or a technical college, and for reasons 

that—because life happens—are beyond their control, they are no 

longer enrolled. 

They have families, they are parenting—they are targeting older 

parents. They are not able to be present on a campus. We gave 

them the opportunity to be able to come back online and complete 

their degrees. 

It has been a great success for us. The program exists for two 

years. We have enrolled more than 1,000 students. 

Forty-three out of the 46 counties in the state of South Carolina 

are represented in the program, which means that it is widespread 

throughout the state. Forty-eight percent of them are members of 

underrepresented minorities, so there is a need. 

And I think there are ways that we can do it with low cost, using 

technology, because these people, you cannot expect them to drop 

everything and come back to campus for two years. And our Palmetto College is a very good example that is receiving national attention along these lines. 

Mr. CARTER. Governor? 

Governor PENCE. Well, first, let me commend you for the focus 

on exactly those people in our state who have, as you mentioned, 

went to college, didn’t complete, have credit hours. And our commission for higher education has made special emphasis on reaching those Hoosiers and explaining to them the opportunities that 

we have, either to return to college, to pursue part-time degrees. 

But it is a real focus of our administration. 

I am also pleased to say that WGU has a very robust presence 

in the state of Indiana, providing exactly the kind of online education that the professor just described, and just in the last two 

days announced some great graduation rates for adult learners. 

The ability to take advantage of technology, we think, is a key component to encouraging Hoosiers to go ahead and finish that degree, 

and then be there in that new economy that, as you mentioned, increasingly, as we all know, is going to require postsecondary attainment. 

Chairman KLINE. Gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Courtney? 

Mr. COURTNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

83 

And thank you, to all the witnesses, for being here today. 

Mr. Chairman, I have an article which I am going to ask to be 

admitted to the record. The title of this—it was published a couple 

days ago in the Hartford Courant, our largest daily newspaper in 

the state. The headline is ‘‘Connecticut’s Hiring Hasn’t Been This 

Good Since 1998.’’ 

[The information follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

84 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 1 here 92960.001
85 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 2 here 92960.002
86 

Mr. COURTNEY. Job growth in 2014 was the strongest it has been 

in Connecticut since 1998, with 26,700 new net jobs. Again, that 

is a higher number than the entire—the 21st century. 

And I say that not just to boast about my state, which I am always happy to do—we dominate basketball now. Governor, sorry. 

Men and women’s. 

[Laughter.] 

But again, this is a state which also has the highest per capita 

income, and it is also a state which last year raised the minimum 

wage. Governor Malloy was the first governor in America to lead 

the fight to raise the minimum wage. It passed. 

We also passed a paid sick leave law, up to 10 days, again, with 

an exemption for the mom-and-pops. But the fact of the matter is 

that these policies occurred despite all of the catechism that we 

hear over and over again on the Hill here about, you know, how 

harmful that would be to growth, and yet we have had the best 

growth since 1998. 

And you have already addressed the minimum wage, Professor 

Mishel. If you could talk about paid sick leave in terms of, you 

know, the impact it has, aside from having sick people coughing on 

your food in restaurants, which nobody wants. I mean, what are 

the benefits, in terms of the workforce, when those policies are implemented, and how it is not antithetical to growth? 

Mr. MISHEL. Well, thank you very much for your question. Nice 

to see you again. 

I was asked earlier how many people get paid sick leave, and I 

didn’t have the answers. My handy research assistant provided 

them to me. 

The top 25 percent of workers in terms of pay, 84 percent of 

them get paid sick leave. But the bottom 25 percent, only 30 percent have paid sick leave. 

So, you know, we have experiences in New Jersey, California, 

and Connecticut that indicate that doing these things doesn’t hurt 

jobs, doesn’t hurt the economy. Obviously, people don’t want to be 

faced with the choice of having to not show up at work or leave 

someone sick at home. 

This is something that falls most heavily on women, and so if we 

really want people to be able to participate in the economy, and 

just a matter of common decency, I think, is to make sure that people have some kind of minimal benefit like that. 

May I pause one second and say something about manufacturing 

that we have heard discussion of? 

I have been involved in manufacturing policy, and I have worked 

with manufacturing workers for over 30 years. You know, given 

what has happened in manufacturing in this country, which I think 

is very important, why would we think that someone in high school 

is going to look at a manufacturing job and say, ‘‘That is something 

that is going to be there the rest of my working career. I want to 

get a job there,’’ given the trade policies we have in this country, 

given the fact that we don’t actually support manufacturing? 

Second, I have been studying the manufacturing wage premium. 

Manufacturing does pay better than other jobs, I think—and that 

is a great thing. But if that pay premium has substantially deCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

87 

clined over the last 30 years, so in fact, it is not as good an opportunity as it used to. 

The last thing is, we know that employers provide a lot less— 

I will call it training, on the job, than they used to, but we don’t 

have any surveys. So maybe there is one thing that people across 

the political spectrum here can agree, we need to have surveys 

done by BLS, that they used to do, which actually ask employers 

what kind of training do they actually provide on the job, because 

we have seen that go away. 

Mr. COURTNEY. Thank you. I mean, actually, I would sort of edit 

that a little bit, because what I would say is that the smart employers actually do engage in that kind of, you know, training, skill 

growth for incumbent workers. 

Mr. MISHEL. Absolutely. 

Mr. COURTNEY. Electric Boat, which has just been awarded the 

largest ship-building contract in American history for the Virginiaclass submarine, has a unionized workforce. They are producing 

submarines under budget, ahead of schedule consistently, because 

they approach this as an team, not as an us-versus-them situation. 

I just want to—my time is about to run out. I want Mr. 

Greenblatt to feel good about something here today, in terms of my 

Q&A. There is actually, I think more receptivity to your comments 

regarding the excise tax than—and I think, actually, Professor 

Mishel and you might have a good conversation on that, but we 

will reserve that for another day. 

So thank you all for being here today. 

Chairman KLINE. Gentleman yields back. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Brat? 

Mr. BRAT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I had a question in mind and a statement. As a professor that 

may go on for 30 seconds, so give me 30 before I get to the question. And I am thankful to Governor Pence for invoking Plutarch. 

I was waiting for my inroad. 

Very good. Thank you. Very good. So both of you can weigh back 

on this. 

In a policy setting like this, it is a little ironic to note that policy 

itself did not make the United States of America the greatest country in the world, right? The free market system and our rule of law 

did that. 

And so we go back to 1800, and modern economic growth takes 

off. Adam Smith, the invisible hand; James Madison, the Constitution; and you get modern economic growth for the first time in history, right? All the rest of human history made about $500 per year 

per capita, right? 

And so it is interesting in this policy forum that doesn’t come up 

enough, so I am glad I heard a little Plutarch, and kids’ passions, 

and following their dreams in the business world. And it is crucially important and makes all the difference. 

And so here are the two questions: Do our kids in any meaningful way—and I taught for 18 years so I know the answer to this— 

know what the free market system is? Right? 

The free market system has to be chosen by your society. We 

have always had trade. The Greeks had trade, trade the Agora, 

whatever. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

88 

But countries have not chosen the free market system. And the 

most free countries are the most prosperous. That is what we all 

want; that is what everybody in here wants. 

And then secondly, more cynically—that is a hard one, right; 

that might be college level—do our kids in K–12 know what a business is? So we are doing skills conversations in here, and that is 

all great—trades and—I am in favor of all that. I think it is totally 

bipartisan. I can’t imagine how we are not going to do that for the 

kids. 

But they are doing this for K–12 for 13 years of their life and 

they don’t know what a business is, right? At the end of—if you 

asked a kid, ‘‘What is a business?’’ at the end of 12th grade, they 

might not be able to answer that. 

And so I don’t know if you have, Governor, any ideas of how to 

get the kids to reveal their passions at an early age so they know 

that they can use their passions in a vocation that is important to 

them in a business, and if they don’t know that up front, all the 

skills training may not be for the best end. So I just—I am throwing that opened. 

Governor PENCE. You bet. Well, thank you, Congressman. Thank 

you for your thoughtful comments, of which I am in strong agreement that the freedom of this country, our market freedom, the 

character and the faith of the American people explains the extraordinary success of the American experiment. 

I would tell you, though, that with regard to this issue of career—it is one of the reasons why I like to say ‘‘career and vocational education’’ as opposed to ‘‘career and technical,’’ because in 

Indiana, for instance, one of the things we are doing—when I was 

in Kokomo, Indiana recently I visited a high school that is ahead 

of the curve on what we are doing in this area. And I visited a 

welding class and there were terrific kids there, some of which are 

headed off to Purdue University to study engineering, and some of 

which are hoping to be in a welding school in Ohio that is one of 

the premier in the country. 

But then the next class I met with was the entrepreneurial class. 

That class is also part of the CTE curriculum. And the class actually itself changes place—I think it is every month they spend an 

entire month—several days a week—in a business, learning the 

business, and all different—financial services, and real estate, and 

health care, and learning that business, learning how it operates. 

And the end result of that course is these kids all—and they 

were just—so impressed with all the kids that I met—but they 

were standing there proudly telling me about the business plan 

that they were going to be submitting. And here is what they do 

in Kokomo: At the end of this career and technical education class, 

not only do they have to submit a business plan, but they submit 

it to local investors, okay, and with the idea that this may be an 

idea, a business whose time has come in Howard County, Indiana. 

So I really would encourage policymakers at this level, when you 

see Indiana moving boldly in this direction, we are really looking— 

we are looking to do, I think, in a very real sense, exactly what you 

are saying, and going well beyond traditional understandings of 

skills education, and really equipping young people. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

89 

And my criteria is, if someone wants to start their career right 

after high school I want them to have the opportunity to get the 

background, the training, the practical experience, the internship, 

or the industry-recognized certification to be able to do that. 

I think it is a powerful idea. I think it speaks in a practical level 

to exactly what you are talking about, and exposing young people 

to businesses and enterprises, large and small, in their region I 

think will go a long way to them understanding the truth of what 

you said. 

Chairman KLINE. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. Clark? 

Ms. CLARK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, to all the witnesses today, for being part of this 

conversation. 

And, Governor Pence, I appreciate your time and being here 

today. I am sorry we did not get to serve together, but I am very 

heartened to hear you talk about the importance of quality early 

education, and with your focus on career and vocational education, 

the recognition that it starts with our very youngest learners, 

which is certainly backed up by the educational research, and certainly I have heard from our business leaders around this country 

and in my state of Massachusetts, as a priority. 

So I wonder if you could expand a little bit. Indiana is a category 

one state, was eligible for up to $80 million under the Preschool 

Development Grant, and I know you said there were some issues 

maybe with your administration and with the legislature in Indiana. What specifically made them decide to pursue a $10 million 

state-funded pilot program rather than going for this money? 

Governor PENCE. Well, thank you, Congresswoman. And I can 

tell already that I would have counted it a privilege to serve with 

you. I appreciate your courtesy very much. 

Let me correct, if I can, the record, very respectfully. It was not 

a decision between either/or. 

I pursued the creation of the very first publicly supported preK program in the state of Indiana, and we managed to pass a pilot 

program in the year 2014 that really crossed an important threshold in the state of Indiana, where the people of our state said yes 

to opening doors of opportunity for disadvantaged kids to be able 

to have access to quality pre-K. We put $10 million behind that out of excess reserve funds. And 

in the budget that we just unveiled, we are seeking from the Indiana General Assembly $10 million per year to fully fund that preK program. 

But I would tell you, through the legislative process, of which 

you may be still relatively new here, but not in your career I suspect, the general assembly in Indiana very much wanted to pursue 

this on a pilot basis, to have us learn—four urban counties, one 

rural county—to learn about diverse programs, diverse delivery 

systems, and to internalize those lessons before we made decisions 

about expanding the program. 

And my decision about not applying for a federal funding was 

simply born of two things: I wanted to keep faith with the spirit 

of the pilot program that had been created and embraced by our 

legislature, and thereby, by the people of Indiana. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

90 

And secondly, I was very hesitant to expand the program before 

it was started. You might notice, if you look at Indiana’s record 

on—whether it be tax reform, education innovation, or even last 

week on health care reform, we like doing things the Indiana way, 

which is to say we bring common-sense Hoosier principles to bear 

on challenges, and we craft solutions that work in our communities 

and in our state. And I very much wanted to keep faith with that. 

So for me, I am very proud of the fact that our administration 

sought and received the very first public funding ever in Indiana 

for quality pre-K education. We are faithfully implementing that, 

and this fall we expect to have more than 1,000 disadvantaged kids 

in pre-K programs around our state, and have already launched 

the program in counties around our state since January this year. 

But I would tell you, in Indiana my decision ultimately was I did 

not want, with all due respect to the federal treasury, I did not 

want to invite federal resources to expand the program before it 

was even started. We wanted to learn from our experience, learn 

from our pilot program. 

But we are going to take those lessons and we are going to look 

in the future, I can assure you, for ways to expand opportunities 

to quality pre-K education in Indiana. I think it is right for our 

kids at the point of the need, and I am confident that as we learn 

the lessons about what programs work and in what ways in Indiana, the people of Indiana will be ready and, as they invariably 

are, be generous in supporting efforts for our most vulnerable kids. 

Ms. CLARK. So was the funding itself tied to expansion? Was that 

the hurdle that you saw? It wouldn’t have helped your pilot program in rolling out? 

Governor PENCE. Well, I think ultimately, accepting federal funding to expand a program before it was started was premature. Our 

aim was to faithfully implement the pilot program that our general 

assembly created. We are in the process of doing that, and I look 

forward to it being a great success for vulnerable kids, and also a 

way that we can chart a course for the future. 

Chairman KLINE. Gentlelady’s time has expired. 

Mr. Messer, you are not going to ask a question of your governor, 

right? 

Mr. MESSER. Yes, well— 

Chairman KLINE. You are recognized for five minutes. 

Mr. MESSER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to say thank you to the witnesses. Thank you for your testimony. And at this stage of the hearing, I thank you for your 

stamina. 

You know, I hung around here to learn and I hung around for 

the opportunity to highlight a couple of my favorite topics, which 

is the leadership of our great Governor Pence, and also the importance of manufacturing for the future of America. And so, with the 

governor’s permission, I am going to ask a question first to Mr. 

Greenblatt and then come back to the governor. 

And, Mr. Greenblatt, we are proud in Indiana to be a place that 

makes things. I believe that a key to the future of America is that 

we remain a place that makes things. I appreciate your work and 

the work of NAM. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

91 

You got close to a couple times in other questions, but I just 

wanted to ask you almost just straight, as members of Congress 

sitting here today—and I believe we do have bipartisan support for 

the desire to make America strong and manufacturing in America 

strong. What would be the one or two things that we could best do 

to help you and your business and help the manufacturing industry 

in America? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. One thing would be tax reform. We have a 

massive disadvantage when we go head to head against Canada 

and Germany and China. We are taxed 15—I am sorry, Canadians 

are taxed 15 percent and we are taxed 40 percent, so that would 

be one topic that is challenging. 

Another topic that is challenging is the regulations. We have a 

tremendous amount of burdensome regulations. 

The average American manufacturing employee has this heavy 

weight of regulations that makes us as a nation less competitive. 

So we lose jobs against France, Germany, and Canada that we 

shouldn’t be losing. 

And if we could reduce some of these burdensome regulations, reduce our taxes, we could really prosper and grow jobs. 

Mr. MESSER. Thank you. And as you highlighted, I mean, I think 

there is a renaissance in manufacturing happening in America. I 

see it in Indiana, where jobs are coming back from overseas. And 

we hope to work with you to do more to help make more of that 

happen. 

Now, to our Governor Pence, appreciate all of your testimony 

today, and again, I appreciate your friendship. I know one of the 

things that you and I are both very proud of is the work that has 

been done in Indiana so that we truly are a state today that not 

one child in Indiana has to have their future on a wait list, that 

parents have, now, the option to find the school that best fits their 

child, be that traditional public school, public school choice, public 

charter schools, virtual schools, and, of course, as you talked about 

just a second ago, the fact that Indiana now has the most robust 

private school choice program in the country. 

Could you talk a little bit, for the record here, about the amazing 

success of that program and what we are doing to even grow those 

opportunities further for kids in Indiana? 

Governor PENCE. Well, thank you, Congressman. And let me congratulate you on your election to a leadership position in the House 

Republican Conference, and also for your efforts to really shine the 

light on school choice across the country, even in the last week. We 

are grateful for that and proud of your service. 

I have long said that there is nothing that ails our schools that 

can’t be fixed by giving parents more choices and teachers more 

freedom to teach. And the agenda that our administration brought 

forward this year, the aim of which is to have 100,000 more kids 

in B or better schools by the fall of 2020, is really an all-of-theabove strategy. 

But choice is a central element of that. As I said to one of your 

colleagues earlier, I really do believe that the advent of public-topublic school choice, public-to-public charter choice, and, of course, 

the largest voucher program in America, which is in the state of 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

92 

Indiana, have resulted in the overall improvement and student 

achievement that we have seen in the state. 

The test scores are up, graduation rates are up, the second-best 

improvement in the country in the Nation’s Report Card, known as 

the NAEP. I think that is all a result of that. 

But I would emphasize that for my part, with all due respect to 

the best-intentioned bureaucrat in the world, no one has a better 

idea about where my kids are going to thrive, where their imagination and potential is going to be kindled, than Karen and I do. And 

particularly focusing, as we did in our school choice voucher program, on the ability of parents to choose the school—public, public 

charter, or private— that would best serve their needs will continue to be a lodestar in Indiana. 

Mr. MESSER. Thanks for your leadership— 

Chairman KLINE. Gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. Adams, you are recognized? 

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Thank you, to all the witnesses. 

Dr. Mishel, you indicated that improving educational attainment 

was important for all children to have the opportunity to rise up 

in that income ladder, and I agree with that. I am a 40-year educator, having completed 40 years at Bennett College, in Greensboro. 

But I believe that education must not only be accessible, but it 

has got to be affordable. And with the increased costs of higher 

education making it more difficult for students to complete postsecondary education, it is especially true for low-income and minority 

students. 

For example, students at HBCUs—North Carolina has more 4- 

year accredited HBCUs than any other state—it is very, very difficult for these students. They are penalized for what is called Parent PLUS loans. Parent PLUS loans are basically not a plus, they 

are a minus. 

But my question is, what do you think we can do to make Parent 

PLUS loans more of a plus than a minus? Secondly, can you talk 

about the effect of lesser education attainment on wages, especially 

those for minorities and women? And what would be the educational outlook for students who aren’t able to pursue higher education because of financial barriers? 

Mr. MISHEL. Well, I will take part of that. I don’t know whether 

you wanted the person from the university to answer the other 

part. 

First of all, I want to say I have been to Bennett College. I visited my good friend, Julianne Malveaux, when she was the president. Welcome to Washington. 

I think, you know, providing opportunities—and I understand 

the challenges of the students there, and what Julianne had to do 

to try to assist students to be able to come to Bennett College and 

to get through, with parents, most of whom had never gone to college themselves, or were working-class or poor. 

It is really essential that we provide as many opportunities as 

possible to break down all the barriers to community college, to college, because what it really does is give access to jobs—to be able 

to compete for jobs in the future, so those students will do better 

than their parents. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

93 

What it really won’t do, I am afraid to say, is it is not really a 

recipe for overall wage growth, because what we see is that wages 

have been flat for college grads, for community college grads, and 

high school grads. So we can take people and move people up to 

different groups, but what we really need are policies that lift 

wages for all the different groups in America. 

Thank you. 

Ms. ADAMS. So do you agree that, you know, I think I heard 

some comments about different wages for students and other folks, 

and knowing and having worked with young people for a long time, 

I know the responsibilities that they bring with them to school, trying to finance their education, taking care of families costs them 

the same thing to buy a loaf of bread as it would anybody else, so, 

you know, I just wanted to, you know, put that out there. 

But certainly if the gentleman—governor would like to speak to 

this issue, I certainly would love to hear from him—or Dr. 

Amiridis. 

Governor PENCE. Go ahead, Doctor. 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. Let me first of all mention that in the state just 

south from you, in the state of South Carolina, the University of 

South Carolina is very proud of our Gamecock Guarantee program. 

Over the last six years we have supported 900 students with family 

incomes below the poverty level, guaranteeing them full support if 

they manage to maintain academic standards. 

What we have seen is that when you take the financial question 

out of the pictures, these students perform better, actually, than 

the average student because they had the desire, they had the 

drive to succeed in school and to lift themselves out of what have 

been generational cycles of poverty that they have experienced. 

I was in front of the House Ways and Means Committee in the 

state of South Carolina last week and I asked them for need-based 

funding. Many of our states have very good merit-based programs. 

We need need-based funding. I think it is very important at the 

state level, and of course, the Pell Grants. Support the Pell Grants, 

expand the Pell Grants to the extent that you can at the federal 

level. 

There is no question that a degree in higher education is a balance. You can view it as public good or private benefit. And that 

is what our system reflects. 

Part of the state and the federal government is paying for the 

public good part of it, and part of the individual pays for the public 

benefit—for the private benefit part of it. 

I think there are creative solutions to the loans, in terms of how 

do you ask them to repay the loan. Should they repay the loan 

based on their earning ability after they leave college? 

How do we guarantee that we get the money back? Do we count 

the money—and there are solutions like this that they have been 

advanced at the state level and the federal level that I think your 

committee can bring experts in to testify and talk about. 

Chairman KLINE. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

Mr. DeSaulnier? 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations on 

the pronunciation; that was great. And I want to thank you— 

Chairman KLINE. See my notes here on how to pronounce that. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

94 

Mr. DESAULNIER. You passed. 

And to the ranking member for doing this. So it has really been 

thrilling. It is funny to come at the end. It reminds me of the 

Churchill line of everything has already been said but not everyone 

has said it. 

So, Dr. Mishel, I did want to talk to you about public research 

facilities. I represent the—much of the East Bay in the San Francisco Bay Area. We have two national laboratories and we have the 

University of California, that prides itself as a research facility, as 

you know. 

When I go and see them they tell me about the very exciting 

public-private partnerships they are doing with the private sector, 

as you mentioned. But they also lament the fact that we are not 

investing as much in public research for the government, particularly the federal government. 

Is that true in your experience as well? And is that a danger, do 

you think? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. I think the availability of funds has decreased. It 

is true what they are telling you, that the availability of the funds 

has decreased. 

And I am a true believer in public-private partnerships, but it 

has to be a partnership. We cannot expect for the private sector to 

do everything for us without us contributing what we can. So I 

think our colleagues in the Bay Area are giving you the right picture. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. I appreciate that. 

Dr. Mishel, you mentioned consumers, and I am—I was—like 

you, my father was a Republican and I owned small businesses. I 

was in the restaurant business. 

So one of the most important things for the success and opportunity for Americans is customers. So we have—and the speaker 

mentioned this in our first meeting when we were sworn in—is this 

sort of perfect storm of not just wage stagnation, but fixed household costs going up. So for somebody in the restaurant business, 

you would read the restaurant trade magazines and disposable income are really important. 

So who spends money? Wealthy people. When I managed to own 

a restaurant in San Francisco there were plenty of wealthy people. 

You gave them a product they liked, you didn’t have to worry about 

it. 

When I owned a business in Concord, California, which was 

much more working-class, the kind of regulations that the governor 

mentioned were more vexing because my consumers didn’t have 

enough disposable income. 

Could you speak to that? 

Mr. MISHEL. Yes. Thank you very much for your question. 

I would just say, there are two things. One, my analysis of the 

economy is that we still face a shortfall in aggregate demand, and 

that is one reason why we have this excessive unemployment. That 

is the aftermath of the financial crisis, and that is why fiscal austerity at the state level and the federal level has actually hurt very 

much—you know, we have lost 2 million or 3 million jobs because 

of that. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

95 

But we also have a long-term problem, where we—I think our— 

we have growth challenge because of the change in income distribution, and I think that is what you are talking about, because 

the incomes have shifted to those who consume less. And I think 

moving forward, we will see consumption growth be more challenged than it has in the past. 

In the past, families have gotten by taking on more debt, by 

sending more people into the workforce, and perhaps benefiting 

from the housing market bubble. Those things aren’t going to be 

available going forward. So if we don’t actually grow the old-fashioned way, where people earn higher wages and spend it from that, 

we won’t be able to grow as well as we could. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. Governor Pence, I wanted to commend you on 

your work on regulation, but my experience is it is making sure the 

regulation is effective, the ones we have. So my questions are to 

you: Did you do cost-benefits with the legislature so that there are 

regulations that actually are helpful to the economy? So when you 

went through that process, did you do that? 

Governor PENCE. That is the policy of the state of Indiana our 

Office of Management and Budget initiated, after we declared a 

moratorium on any new regulation when I became governor two 

years ago—other than that which was mandated by federal law. 

We did a full-scale look-back and have been in that process of doing 

precisely that, Congressman, is a cost-benefit analysis and determining where we might be able to cut red tape without compromising worker safety and environmental concerns. 

Mr. DESAULNIER. So the result of that, there were some regulations. I think all of us agree less regulation is better, but there are 

regulations that are actually effective. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Jeffries, you are recognized? 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I thank Governor Pence and all of the witnesses for your 

very thoughtful testimony today. 

Let me start with Mr. Greenblatt. 

It is my understanding that in your testimony you mentioned 

that we need solutions, not bromides and bombastic rhetoric. Is 

that correct? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Yes. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. And that in order to, you know, move the economy 

forward we really need—think the phrase was ‘‘collective, serious 

discussion.’’ Is that correct? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Yes. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Now, in terms of the National Association of Manufacturers’ position on comprehensive immigration reform, am I 

correct that it is your view that comprehensive immigration reform 

would be helpful to our economy moving forward? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. We need more talented immigrants coming to 

our country so that they can—you know, we need to keep all the 

wonderful people that are graduating—foreigners graduating from 

our colleges in engineering and doctor degrees—medical, et cetera. 

We need those people to stay here, not go back to China or back 

to India. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

96 

We need them to stay here and either work at American companies, create innovations here in America, or create companies here 

in America. We need that entrepreneurial zeal to really supercharge the economy again. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. And I assume you would agree with the statement 

that, with respect to moving forward on comprehensive immigration reform, we need less sort of rhetoric and need to move to a 

place where we can actually accomplish results and enact the type 

of changes that you believe would be helpful for the economy? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. My great-grandmother, Kate, came over from 

Russia in 1904. It was critical—either that or she would live a very 

terrible life. I am so thankful she came here to America. 

America needs immigrants to thrive and to prosper. They rejuvenate our economy and they grow our system. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. And I will thank you for that. I am actually privileged to represent more Russian-speaking Jewish immigrants from 

the former Soviet Union than any other member of Congress in the 

country, in Brighton Beach and other neighborhoods in Brooklyn. 

And certainly we have benefited, as New York City has benefited, 

from the hard work of these immigrant families. 

To Dr. Amiridis, you mentioned, I believe, in your testimony that 

amongst the mix of things important to promoting higher education 

for our students in a way that would benefit the country is Pell 

Grants. Is that correct? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. That is correct. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. And are you aware that in the Republican budget 

proposed in the last Congress for fiscal year 2015, that the House 

majority sought to cut $125 billion in Pell Grants over the next 10 

years? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. I don’t follow the legislative issues that closely, but 

I will take your word for it. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Would you support that type of cut? 

Mr. AMIRIDIS. I think that any cut to the Pell Grants would put 

students at risk, and these are the students that need this education more than anybody else. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Thank you. 

Dr. Mishel, as you mentioned, the productivity of the American 

worker has increased significantly above 70 percent since the 

1970s. Is that correct? 

Mr. MISHEL. That is correct. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. Yet, wages have remained relatively stagnant for 

the middle-class worker during that same time period, correct? 

Mr. MISHEL. That is correct. The only time they actually rose 

was in the period of the late 1990s, when we had persistent low 

unemployment. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. And so middle-class workers have not been able to 

benefit from the economic growth generated from their increased 

productivity, correct? 

Mr. MISHEL. Sure. I would even say that even though Indiana is 

near to nirvana, the workers in Indiana even have seen falling 

wages. The median hourly wage in Indiana has fallen 6 percent 

since 2000. So this has happened across the country. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. How do we address this systematic issue to make 

sure that hardworking Americans, working families, moderate-inCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

97 

come folks, middle-class Americans throughout this country can actually benefit from the clear increased productivity that has served 

the country’s economy well, but hasn’t necessary inured to the benefit of the workers who have made it actually happen? 

Mr. MISHEL. That is a great question. I think the first and foremost is, we have to actually act as if better-quality jobs and higher 

wages is actually our foremost concern about the economy. 

We can raise productivity, we can have better growth, but unless 

we do the things that are needed to actually link higher wages to 

productivity growth, most people aren’t going to benefit. As I said, 

higher minimum wage, stronger access to collective bargaining, 

higher labor standards, eliminate wage theft—all those kinds of 

things are needed. 

Mr. JEFFRIES. I would just note that you mentioned consumer demand as one of the problems impacting the American economy. 

And obviously, just like gas prices dropping puts more money in 

the hands of the American worker, they will save more and spend 

more, that benefits everyone, so, too, would an increase in the minimum wage. 

I yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. I thank the gentleman. 

I want to thank the witnesses for your stamina; I think was 

pointed out earlier, this really is an excellent panel of witnesses. 

I very much appreciate your testimony and your frank answers to 

questions. 

Before I gavel down, I want to turn to Mr. Scott for any closing 

remarks he may have? 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you for holding the hearing. We got a lot of really good information. 

I was particularly impressed with the consensus on vocational 

education in high school, with the understanding that it does not 

diminish the academics but adds to the academics, because we 

don’t want students to leave high school without the fundamental 

background that—an academic background. And with that understanding, there is a lot of consensus that can be achieved. 

We also found the importance of financial aid to colleges, including research, so that our young people can not only be doing the 

research, but a lot of college students are not getting jobs if we are 

not doing the research. And I’m delighted to see a consensus on the 

need for comprehensive immigration reform. 

Again, this shows what happens when you have a hearing, we 

can find a lot of common ground that is apparently not going to 

happen on ESEA, and we would hope that we would delay the consideration of that legislation until such time as we can have meaningful hearings to find what common ground there may be. 

Yield back. 

Chairman KLINE. Thank the gentleman for his comments and for 

yielding back. 

I want to again thank the witnesses. I am trying to think, we are 

just having a discussion, if we have ever had a hearing where Plutarch came up. I don’t think so, so I am grateful for that. 

Like Mr. Scott, I love the discussion on CTE. I do hope that we 

don’t get ourselves bound up between whether it is vocational or 

technical, or education or training. We know where we are trying 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

98 

to go with that, and I think there is bipartisan consensus that we 

ought to be doing that and ought to be doing more of it. 

Just one final comment on training, I am sorry that Ms. Foxx, 

like most members, has had to move onto other things; the hour 

is getting late. I noted to her before that in my 25 years in the Marine Corps we did a lot of training, and I actually didn’t know very 

many dogs there, but I am now questioning the whole thing. 

So again, I hope semantics doesn’t get us down and we get on 

to the issue that the governor has explained so well. And we certainly hope that program is working in Indiana as we look out 

across the country. 

There being no further business, the Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:38 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

Æ 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER