Testimony of the Honorable Ken Mayfield
President, National Association of Counties
Before the
House Committee on Education and the Workforce on
HR 444, the Back to Work Incentive Act of 2003 and Reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998

February 12, 2003

Chairman Boehner, Mr. McKeon, Mr. Porter and the other distinguished members of this Committee, my name is Ken Mayfield and I am the president of the National Association of Counties (NACo) and a county commissioner from Dallas County, Texas.

I would like to thank Mr. Porter for introducing the legislation that is the principle focus of this hearing. It is an important step toward increasing services to unemployed and dislocated workers.

I would also like to thank the chairman for inviting me to testify. I am deeply honored to have been asked to testify on HR 444, the Back to Work Incentive Act of 2003 and to offer some comments on the reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act.

The National Association of Counties is the only organization representing America’s counties in Washington, DC. As you know, every county in America is involved in a local workforce program. We believe that these programs – as established under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 – have been responding to today’s workforce crisis effectively and responsibly.

The decision by this committee to consider legislation that would enhance the existing workforce system is a vote of confidence in the system, and a vote of confidence that we share with you.

America’s counties share your concern for the on-going workforce crisis. As you know, long-term unemployment stands at a 50 year high and a recent article in the New York Times noted that the United States economy is in the worst hiring slump in 20 years. While all of us were pleased that the percentage of unemployed workers dipped by three-tenths of one percent last month, we are not out of the woods yet, and the numbers of unemployed Americans who are running out of unemployment insurance will continue to rise if current trends continue. All of us, regardless of party or political interests, share an unyielding desire to ensure that every American who wants to work, is able to work.

NACo believes that the HR 444 would help us achieve that goal. Like you we seek to:

· Accelerate the re-employment of unemployed persons;

· Enhance their ability to remain on the job; and

· Provide these individuals with greater flexibility and choice when obtaining re-employment assistance.

And like many of you on this distinguished committee, we support, in general, this legislative proposal and urge you to adopt it with modifications.

We support your efforts to:

1. Make personal re-employment accounts a part of the workforce development system established through the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 by requiring that funds and activities be channeled through the local workforce investment areas and the local one stop systems;

2. Limit substantially the amount of funds that may be used at the state and local levels for administrative purposes to ensure that the bulk of resources are used to obtain training and employment assistance and to return to work;

3. Institute sufficient flexibility so that individuals may step outside of the parameters established through individual training accounts or ITAs and utilize different types of services; and

4. Make these funds directly available to recipients either through vouchers or direct reimbursements to clients.

We also believe that some modifications to your proposal would strengthen it and ensure that individuals obtain the kinds of assistance they need to return to work. I would, therefore, like to take a moment to outline some of our concerns and provide you with a number of recommendations.

County elected officials involved in Workforce Investment Act programs take their roles and responsibilities very seriously. We welcome the authority and responsibilities given to us under the Act and have attempted to carry out those activities in a way that is accountable to you the Congress, the Administration, the states, but most importantly, local businesses and individuals receiving employment and training services.

We seek the same levels of authority, responsibility and accountability in this proposal. However, as written this proposal would make us accountable for the resources used, but would give us very little authority to ensure that the resources are used properly.

We share your view that individuals should be given as much flexibility and latitude to use the resources as they wish; we also believe that the local one stop system can provide these individuals with substantial guidance and assistance. We have spent the last five years building this system and we believe that local one stop systems have developed the kinds of skills and craft necessary to guide unemployed individuals through the maze of intensive, supportive and training services available.

We, therefore, would urge this committee to modify the proposal so that:

1. Each individual receiving a personal re-employment account is required to establish a personal re-employment plan at the local one stop system office to which they are referred. We believe that the flexibility and latitude that you have built into this act must be maintained; however, we also believe that these individuals would benefit from the guidance, direction and support the local one stop system can provide.

2. As a condition of receiving administrative dollars to operate this program, local workforce investment areas should be required to amend their plans to reflect the kinds of services they will provide to individual’s receiving personal re-employment accounts so that governors are certain that a minimum standard of services is provided state-wide.

3. When appropriate, local workforce investment areas should be permitted to add crucial Workforce Investment Act funds to an individual’s personal re-employment account to ensure that they can purchase the types of training and assistance they need to achieve the outcomes expressed in their personal re-employment plan. Reports from local workforce areas indicate that ITAs often can cost in excess of $3,000, the likely limit for personal re-employment accounts.

4. Local one-stop systems should be permitted to charge for services other than those needed to develop the personal re-employment plan (which should be covered by the 5 percent administrative allowance provided by formula to local areas.)

5. Bonuses should be available to individuals who obtain employment after following and completing their individual re-employment plan if the plan requires that they participate in employment and training activities beyond 13 weeks.

6. Individuals who lose their jobs within the first year of employment through no fault of their own should be permitted to receive Workforce Investment Act intensive and training services. Such examples might include a plant or business closing or a reduction in force due to changing economic circumstances.

7. Funds appropriated for personal re-employment accounts should be in addition to those funds appropriated for other Workforce Investment Act programs and that the funds for personal re-employment accounts not be permitted to supplant other funding.

8. The Back to Work Incentive Act of 2003 should not become a vehicle by which to reauthorize the Workforce Investment Act (except as is necessary to establish this program) or to reform the Wagner-Peyser Act, the Employment Service or the unemployment insurance system.

We also urge you to clarify in your committee report that the term local area referenced in HR 444 is, in fact, a local workforce investment area as designated under section 116 of the Workforce Investment Act. We also urge you to clarify that the one-stop delivery system referenced in HR 444 is the same as the one-stop delivery systems delineated in section 121 of the Act.

I would also like to take this opportunity to outline our most significant concerns regarding reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act or WIA. As you know, the National Association of Counties has been a long-standing supporter of a federally sponsored and locally operated workforce development system. NACo also believes that the Workforce Investment Act represents a major improvement over its predecessor, the Job Training Partnership Act or JTPA.

NACo will urge Congress to modify the Workforce Investment to ensure its continued effectiveness in addressing the needs of all of America’s workers. NACo believes that modifications to WIA should be minimal and efforts to reform the act should be limited to those issues likely to enhance the program for both employers and workers.

I would like to take this opportunity to outline 15 principles that NACo hopes will be adhered to during the reauthorization process:

1. NACo believes that the local public-private partnership as established under the Workforce Investment Act should be maintained. Decisions about how the partnership should be implemented at the local level should be left to local elected officials and local workforce boards in consultation with states.

2. NACo believes that the federal-state-local relationship established by the Workforce Investment Act should be maintained to ensure that appropriate planning authority and accountability is maintained.

3. NACo believes that appointment authority for the local workforce investment boards must remain with chief local elected officials. Local elected officials should work with local business organizations to identify appropriate business leaders within the local workforce investment area to serve on local boards and governors should continue to have the authority to certify local workforce investment boards. The states have no first hand knowledge of or experience

4. NACo believes that local one-stop centers should remain under the guidance and jurisdiction of local chief elected officials and local workforce investment boards, as provided for in current law. These one-stop centers should be accountable to the local chief elected official for all monies spent to prevent the misuse of public funds.

5. NACo believes that the vast majority of funds allotted to states should be allocated by formula to local workforce investment areas. Where appropriate, the Congress should make adjustments to the formulae in order to achieve a more balanced and equitable distribution of funds. The reallocation authority currently given to governors should be retained.

6. NACo also believes that emphasis should be placed on incumbent worker training so that individuals whose skills are becoming antiquated may obtain the appropriate training to remain competitive in the job market.

7. NACo believes that the percentage of private sector representatives on the local workforce investment boards should be increased and the number and percentage of public sector representatives, especially the mandatory partners, should be reduced substantially or eliminated. Representatives from these public agencies may be asked to participate in meetings when issues relevant to them arise; however, the decision-making authority on the local workforce investment boards should rest with the private sector. NACo believes that the public-private partnership is represented by the partnership that is forged between the local chief elected official and his or hers local workforce investment board. Decisions made by these two entities represent the public-private partnership at work.

8. NACo believes that local workforce investment area plans should be developed jointly by the local chief elected official and the local workforce investment board within broad policy and programmatic guidelines developed by the governor and the state workforce investment boards. Local workforce investment areas and states should be granted broad waiver authority to creatively respond to the employment, economic development and welfare issues confronting states and localities. Requests for waivers should be developed jointly by local elected officials and workforce investment boards, should be limited to the delivery of program services and the allocation of funds to different activities and must receive the approval of governors before they can be enacted.

9. NACo continues to believe that local one-stop centers should be funded either through a separate congressional appropriation in addition to funds for workforce development core, intensive and training services or through contributions from each of the mandatory partners. These funds should be allotted to or collected by the states and distributed to local areas based upon the formulae used to distribute program funds.

10. NACo believes that individuals should have immediate access to core, intensive or training services, and that requirements which mandate that individuals shall receive anyone service prior to another defeat the overall purpose and goal of the Workforce Investment Act. Therefore, NACo supports granting local one stop centers greater flexibility with regard to the provision of services and utilization of training funds.

11. NACo believes that youth programs for in- and out-of school youth should continue to be developed and funded by local workforce investment boards acting in consort with their local chief elected officials. Funds for these programs should continue to be allocated to local areas. They should be used in part to address the needs of students making the transition from school to work and to assist those students no longer in school develop the skills they need to enter the world of work.

12. NACo supports Personal Re-Employment Accounts but believes that they should be part of the WIA system and should come under the guidance and oversight of local chief elected officials and WIA local WIB board members

13. NACo supports efforts to align resources for greater flexibility. Funds for adult, youth and dislocated workers should be consolidated into a single block grant so that local areas may determine the kinds of populations to serve based upon need.

14. NACo believes that the performance standards and measures should be modified substantially and should focus on program outcomes and customer satisfaction.

15. NACo also recognizes the need for management information and NACo recommends that Congress delineate the differences between those data collected to determine performance and those that are used to manage information.

The National Association of Counties believes strongly that workforce development programs represent an important tool for the federal, state and local governments to respond to the continuing employment crisis. While no workforce program can ensure that every American who wishes to work can work – that can only be ensured by a robust economy with substantial job creation capability – we do believe that the current system is well positioned to address the needs of America’s unemployed workers and businesses. We believe that the Back to Work Incentive Act and the Workforce Investment Act, of which it will become a part if enacted into law, represent important steps toward helping all Americans find work. We, therefore, welcome this proposal and endorse it with the modifications recommended. We also urge you to reauthorize the Workforce Investment Act keeping in mind that modifying the governance structure or the current methods for allocating funds will have no effect on the quality of the services provided.

Chairman Boehner, that concludes my remarks. I want to thank you again for this opportunity to testify before the committee and welcome any questions that you may have.