tv Education Sec. De Vos on Presidents 2020 Budget Request CSPAN March 31, 2019 2:26pm-4:00pm EDT
of violence is women, it is because of guns. >> all right, we keep following your reporting national journal .com and on twitter. thanks so much for your time. >> thank you. >> betsy devos testified this week before a house appropriations subcommittee about president trump's 2020 budget request for the education department. here is a portion of the hearing chaired by connecticut delauro.oman >> thank you, madam chairman and committee chairman for being here. thank you secretary for being here today. i would like to get to three or four areas so if we can be concise, i appreciate it. i want to follow-up on something she asked about what suspensions . i notice you never mentioned sexual orientation or gender identity. do you think is ok for a school to disconnect based on gender identity or sexual orientation? >> we have laws that cover
secretary devos: we have laws that cover discriminatory efforts. our office for civil rights has continued to be very diligent in investigating any allegation of discrimination and will continue to do so. mr. pocan: is that a yes or no? i'm trying to get a yes or no. secretary devos: we follow the law -- mr. pocan: personally you don't have an opinion. leads me to the next question. you are giving money to charter schools that do discriminate, i and that report i would like to follow-up from the chairwoman, where $1 billion has been wasted with 1,000 schools. one out of every four charter schools have failed. i know in your testimony, you thought we should have more charter schools. when you have a 25% failure rate that's like being say if one of , your car tires keeps going flat, rather than replacing it, you are going to add more tires to a car. i don't know if that makes a lot of sense. my question would be what are you doing specifically to get that billion dollars back for taxpayers? you have in this budget a $60 million increase, 14% increase,
for this program when we have one out of every four failing. how can you address those two aspects? secretary devos: let me refer again to the fact that the report covered information from a longer period. mr. pocan: i want to get a couple more subjects in. secretary devos: i will go to the fact, again, that we need more charter schools not fewer of them. mr. pocan: what are we doing to get money back for taxpayers? let's try that one first. we needy devos: traditional public schools. mr. pocan: because i'm trying to save time. what are we doing to get money back for taxpayers, the billion dollars that got wasted? secretary devos: i'm not sure that that's the ultimate conclusion, but we'll certainly look into -- mr. pocan: are we doing anything to look into that? secretary devos: we will look into that. can: we're not looking at that. i feel like i'm speaking a different language. sorry. the second part of that is you have an increase, yet we have a failure rate. another area. i want to follow up on the thing ms. lee mentioned about the cuts to special olympics.
do you know how many kids are going to be affected by that cut, madam secretary? mr. pocan, let: me just say, again, we had to make some decisions with this budget. mr. pocan: this is a question, how many kids? secretary devos: i don't know the number of kids. mr. pocan: it's 272,000 kids. i'll answer it for you. no problem. it's 272,000 kids. secretary devos: let me just say special olympics is an awesome organization. one that is well supported by the philanthropic sector as well. pocan: i will reclaim my time. there are a couple more parts to this. also we have cuts that can go in the special education grants to states from the 3d million to $2.2 million, 26% cut. then also in this budget you have a $7.5 million cut to the national technical institute for the blind, $13 million cut for gall debt university, $5 million for federal program for print books for blind students. you recently had a federal judge
rule against us on areas around special education. i have two nephews with autism. what is it that we have a problem with children who are in special education? why are we cutting all these programs over and over within this budget? secretary devos: sir, we have continued to retain the funding levels for idea and held that level. mr. pocan: i don't think i brought up idea. i believe i brought up special olympics, special education grants to states, the national institute for the blind, gallaudet university, federal program for printing books. if you can address those. secretary devos: i will address the broader question. mr. pocan: or if you can address the question i asked. that's even better. secretary devos: supporting students with special needs, we have continued to hold that funding at a level amount and in the context of a budget proposal , that is a 10% reduction. mr. pocan: i will reclaim my time. you are not going to answer the question. one last one, maybe i'll do better than charter schools if i
get this one covered by you. you've got a cut to the department that's a 12% agency cut, but you have a 15.6% increase in your executive salary appropriation. how can you justify that? secretary devos: so the department funding includes a building modernization piece. mr. pocan: i didn't ask about buildings. secretary devos: it's all part of that budget. mr. pocan: you are ok with a 12% agency cut in light of 15.6% increase in executive salary. by the way, i know it does not come out of this budget, but a $7 million security expense in the last year. secretary devos: we're also funding the next gen initiatives through federal student aid which requires a lot of , investment now to save in the longer term. same thing for the building modernization piece. we're in the process of shrinking down the footprint here from three buildings to two.
and all of that -- the expenditures, they come up front so that the savings can be realized in the longer term. mr. pocan: i'm sorry i wasn't more clear in my questions. thank you. ms. delauro: congressman harris. mr. harris: thank you very much. good to see you again, madam secretary. let me just -- again i'll ask the secretaries when they come before here to explain the president's budget. you have to work within the current statute, right? and the current statute, we have to revert to the old caps, is that correct? secretary devos: yes, that's my understanding. mr. harris: congress hasn't raised the caps. so actually, why anyone up here on this side of this wall here would think that the blame is not on us for not having given you the money to spend more. the bottom line is congress is failing again. that's the bottom line. i trust states and localities on education.
look, there is a basic philosophy. look, people on this side of the wall, some of us are going to agree to disagree. some people think the federal government knows best how to educate people in somerset, i county. i have one of the two poorest counties. i would like to think my board of education and my local county and my state knows how to educate those students. someone up here, hate to say it, you are part of the federal government, i don't think the federal government knows how best to educate those students. i agree with you. the turning over more things to the states i think is good. i also think that freedom is an american principle. i think freedom and choice are principles. and i think that charter schools embody that principle to a large extent. i think it was a great idea to highlight charter schools in your budget. especially the state facilities incentive grants because it always bothered me. i used to sit on the education committee in the state senate in maryland. it used to bother me when at the schoolsabout charter and money for education.
but not for a facility. it's hard to educate without a facility. that's the way the education establishment discourages charter schools. good for you to point that out. you have testified, and you will have to explain and give me the numbers again. the reading, science, and math where we stand in the nation. i'm sorry, in the world. was it 24th in reading, 25th in science, 40th in math? or did i get one of those numbers wrong? secretary devos: 24th in reading. 25th in science. and 40th in math. mr. harris: 40th this math. this is after 40 years of federal involvement. where did we stand in 1979 before the federal government went in to help the states educate americans? if you could get back to me, if you could look that up. secretary devos: they were much higher in the ranking. we have definitely continued to deteriorate. mr. harris: right. let's just step back at the big picture. 1979, we were better. federal government says, words of ronald reagan, the nine most
dangerous -- however many words, i'm here from the federal government, i'm here to help. the federal government came in to help education, and now we're much worse off. madam secretary, i want to thank you for thinking outside the box and how to reverse some of that. i do think some of the principles you have elucidated in the budget get to that. i do want to commend you actually because i have gone and spoken to teachers and parents in my district who worried about a lot about the impact policies of the previous administration. worried a lot about the effect on school discipline. and we are very grateful this administration took a new look at those policies. i would like you to expand a little bit because i do think that one thing the federal government can do is expand the ability of states to be forward thinking in how they provide alternative education for parents and students who choose not to be in a conventional public school. explain the new approach you are going to take to encourage
states to have these foundations that fund alternatives for parents. secretary devos: thanks, congressman, for those comments and the question. this administration continues to support alternative pathways and acknowledges that more and more students are not traditional students. we're going to have regular interface with education and learning throughout our adult lives, particularly children born today. when you think about the fact that a kindergartner today can look forward to entering a work force where 85% of the jobs don't yet exist. we have to be supporting lifelong learning in a way that is meaningful. that goes to some of the recommendations we have made around the short-term pell program. around expanding career and technical education opportunities.
pre-apprenticeship opportunities. there is a proposal in the budget for $60 million to go to pre-apprenticeship programs to that will help prepare students explore these alternative pathways and give them a chance to earn while they are learning. we have a long way to go to really support all of these different alternatives in a meaningful way when you compare it to how we have really weighted every case around the - every equation around the traditional higher education. we're proposing small steps in that direction. mr. harris: thank you very much. i yield back. ms. delauro: congresswoman frankel. ms. frankel: thank you, madam chair. thank you, madam secretary. you have a very nice disposition even though i don't agree with a lot -- some of these budget cuts. thank you so much for being here. i am going to try to find some things we can agree about. ok? let me just start.
i want to talk about sexual assault on college campuses. the department of justice and c.d.c. has repeatedly documented that roughly 20% to 25% of women have been sexually assaulted , most commonly by men. i think also men, maybe about a 16% rate. something smaller than that. women of college age are at the highest risk. first of all, i want to ask you this. i am assuming that you agree that title ix schools are required to respond to acts of sexual violence that impact students' access to education. would you agree with that? secretary devos: i would, congresswoman. but let me just say i have said before and i wanted to emphasize again that one act of sexual violence is one too many. and one student that does not have due process is one too many. ms. frankel: if you could just
to reclaim my time. if we have time, you can talk about the perpetrators and so forth. do you agree that in practice many schools are failing to protect victims or hold the perpetrator accountable? secretary devos: what i know is i have heard from students and i have heard from institutional representatives that the framework that they have had to operate under has not worked for too many students. which is precisely why we're in the process of negotiating rule making. ms. frankel: i want to find some things we can agree on. then we can disagree. i am assuming you would agree that people who are subjected to sexual assaults experience terror, helplessness, profound humiliation, and that sexual assaults are among the most harmful traumatic experiences. can we at least agree on that point?
secretary devos: certainly. ms. frankel: ok. that's great. i think we can all agree that the response of the survivors community is very important for their recovery. we can agree with that? that's good. i know we're on a good path here. and i think we would also agree that authority figures in schools are in a position of great social authority. to help with recovery. we're doing well. all right. we're doing well. i want to assume for a moment that this is a classroom. and that we're meeting on a regular basis. just take a look around. you saw the people who were here. let's assume, i'm not going to pick any person out, that one of the people in here could be a man or woman has been sexually assaulted by another one.
that's in the room. this is a classroom. would you agree that a victim of sexual assault should not be required to sit in a classroom with a perpetrator day after day? can't we agree with that? secretary devos: i would agree with that. but let me just say -- rankel: wait a minute. secretary devos: i respect your desire to go around this. ms. frankel: reclaiming my time to ask the next question. we're doing well, we're agreeing. now, here's my next question. let's say a woman or a man is sexually assaulted as a fraternity house, should that -- by another classmate, should
the victim be required to sit in the classroom with the perpetrator of the sexual assault? secretary devos: congresswoman, i appreciate and respect your desire to continue down this path of questioning. but you know that we're in the middle of the rule making on this. ms. frankel: could you answer my question? secretary devos: no. it is inappropriate for me to continue to comment and answer the questions in the way that you are posing. ms. frankel: here's what i think. i think you agree with me that an assailant shouldn't be allowed to sit next to a victim. so i'm going to -- since i'm running out of time, i guess i have to get to my final question , which maybe we don't agree on. you have proposed changes that if a student is sexually assaulted by a classmate off an off-campus frat, the school is not going to be libel to investigate. i don't really understand that. if the frat is on the campus or the frat is across the street,
it seems to me that the harm, the potential harm to the victim is the same. what that means is, for that victim, all that trauma, all that humiliation is a likelihood that that victim may not go to class, may drop out of school, and it seems to me the university or the college would be subjecting themselves to a violation of title ix. think about it. secretary devos: thank you. ms. frankel: thank you. i yield back. ms. delauro: congresswoman bustos. bustos: thank you. thank you for joining us today. what i'd like to talk about is the borrower. after losing your latest court battle to implement the borrowers defense rule, your department issued guidance that
no school could force a student into mandatory arbitration over dispute involving federal student loans. i think that's good. yet your guidance stresses that schools could continue to use mandatory arbitration as long as the dispute did not involve a federal student loan. is that correct? correct. these enrollment contracts where schools hide these mandatory arbitration clauses in fine print, which is standard, students have to enter these contracts in order to attend school. they don't have a choice. so i'm wondering, madam secretary, why this -- you would continue to encourage schools to take away students' rights as a condition of going to school? secretary devos: congresswoman, let me just speak broadly on the question and the issue. we did not agree with the obama administration's approach to this. i'm certainly very aware of the
court decision, and we're in the process of implementing that. while at the same time, we're continuing to work on revising the rules so that it is one that we think is more fair to both students and taxpayers , ultimately. our partial relief formula is meant to be respectful of taxpayers. there is no student that should be able to make a claim for borrower defense if they have not truly been defrauded or if they are gainfully employed. we're going to continue to work on this rule. and implement as per the judge's orders. ms. bustos: i'm wondering if you can talk about what efforts your department is taking to make sure schools, not including arbitration clauses related to the student loans, as part of their enrollment. if you can -- is your staff monitoring compliance?
secretary devos: we are following the judge's decision in implementing, and at the same time continuing to work on revising the rules. so that process continues to be ongoing. mrs. bustos: ok, i'm going to drill down farther. have you asked the creditors to ensure schools are in compliance? secretary devos: we're following the 2016 rule. and at the same time continuing to work on revising the rule. mrs. bustos: ok. so i -- ok. you are rewriting the rules, correct? secretary devos: we are. ms. bustos: will your rewrite include the existing ban of forced arbitration for federal student loan disputes? secretary devos: that's all part of the consideration. it would be premature to actually comment on the rule before it's actually released for comment. ms. bustos: what's your time line on this?
secretary devos: very soon. within the next few months. mrs. bustos: would you -- - ms. bustos: would you -- probably can predict your answer, but would you be able to commit to act in the best interest of students and uphold the ban on forced arbitration? secretary devos: i commit to acting in the best interest of students. do i that every day in my job. and will continue to commit to working on this rule so that it is one that that we can be very supportive of and equally fair - that is equally fair to students and to taxpayers. ms. bustos: since i got a minute left, going to address teacher shortage. from the state of illinois, we've got a severe teacher shortage issue. about 1,000 positions that can't be filled. number one, it's in chicago. which is outside my congressional district, but the other two are in the cities of peoria and rockford, which are in my district. this is an issue i have done roundtables on this and have
learned from teachers they feel undervalued, underpaid, overworked. your budget cuts a critical department of education program that school districts can use to improve teacher recruitment and retention. and i know that you stated that you consider teacher hiring a local issue. but you have also stated that you wanted to help facilitate the sharing of best practices to bring more teachers into schools. i'm wondering if you can elaborate on some of the best practices and share your next steps to help states and districts with teacher shortages. i'll just leave it at that since we just have a few seconds left. secretary devos: thanks, congresswoman. i, too, have met with and talked with many teachers and know that way too many of them do feel undervalued and underappreciated. that's why our budget has proposed to really give teachers an opportunity to develop themselves in a way that works for them through a teacher voucher that they can use for their own professional development. one of the things i have heard consistently is that they have
been basically told what development to take, when, and where. whether it's relevant to their particular subject area or their particular development need. and so we think that this is a really good way to begin to get at that and to show the kind of honor and respect that they should have. and to elevate their profession. we also think that through the investment in mentorship and residency opportunities that teachers will -- really great teachers will find a way to continue to develop their own career path and not have to leave the classroom as too many of them have to do today in order to continue to develop their own career path, they go into administration, and then they are no longer in the classroom. it doesn't need to be an either-or like that. it can be a both-and. they can continue to be in the class room an develop a career path if they have the
opportunity to teach as teachers to teach the teachers. and the mentorship and residency program will allow that kind of opportunity to develop well. ms. bustos: i yield back. thank you. ms. delauro: congresswoman watson coleman. ms. watson coleman: thank you, madam chairman. thank you, madam secretary, for being here. number one, i want to follow up on a question that congresswoman lee asked specifically, what is your rationale for having rolled back the guidance on dealing with discrimination and civil rights issues in the schools? you mentioned something about quotas. i have read the rule. it has nothing to do with quotas. what is your rationale for having taken that guidance and repealed it? secretary devos: congresswoman, thank you for that question.
again, i will repeat again that i think we share the same goals that every student is treated as , the individuals that they are. ms. watson coleman: i only want to understand one thing. what is the rationale for repealing a guidance with regard to how you address discrimination, disparate impact, and all those things, on an -- in a school environment? secretary devos: well discrimination is wrong. , and it will be pursued. ms. watson coleman: we agree with that. just tell me, if you don't mind, why you felt it was ok to eliminate a guidance that was to help understand how the process is. how is that helpful? secretary devos: actually, the guidance we heard from many, many different quarters that the guidance was actually harming schools and individuals.
ms. watson coleman: thank you. reclaiming my time. i want to ask you -- secretary devos: can i finish the question? ms. watson coleman: every time you talk about your findings, your research, whatever, i would love to see that research. i honest to god would love to see what you rely upon. as you are making -- answering some of these questions about what to do. let me tell you something i really support very much in your budget. and that is to expand access to pell grants for apprenticeship programs, technical programs. i agree with you the route is not always a four-year college education. i want to know that in advance of doing that, since that is an innovation on your part, what are you going to have in place to ensure that something like a trump university that had absolutely no academic relevance is not someone -- not an organization that benefits from this new approach? secretary devos: congresswoman,
this proposal is one that we would like to work with congress to ensure the appropriate boundaries or guardrails are put into place. i think it is an important opportunity. ms. watson coleman: i think congress would very much want to know what your parameters were and accountability system would is going to look like. i want to ask you a question. i have a lot of questions. i will probably get to them in the second round because i have a question with regard to your department's decision not to any longer work with state officials over the redress of victims of for-profit colleges. this particular question was prompted by a letter that my attorney general in the state of new jersey sent to your department several months ago asking why suddenly you are not collaborating with them and sharing information with them so that they could address the wentbility of students who
to schools like the corinthian schools that failed them in any way, shape, or form, and whose loans could be forgiven. a, i would like to know why you have not entered that letter yet. b, i would like to know, what are you all doing about recapturing that money and protecting those students and informing them that they are eligible to have their loans set aside? secretary devos: congresswoman, i certainly want to make sure that we answer your inquiries and requests thoroughly and promptly. if you could just submit a specific question for the record on what this particular matter is, we will be happy to. coleman: i want you to know that the question that this is propped up by the letter dated may 17 two you by our attorney general -- to you by
our attorney general. i would appreciate an answer. i will send you the letter again. i would appreciate an answer in a more timely fashion, and he has not gotten one. i guess i have to yield back now. might have a second-round worth of questions. >> thank you. congresswoman. secretary. madam before i asked my first question, i want to go back to the issue that was raised by congressman pocan regarding the waste of $1 billion on charter schools that ever opened or opened and then closed. and just suggest that if your department was to do due ofigence, not only in terms oversight, but in working to reclaim that $1 billion,
programs such as the special olympics, there would be no need or excuse for eliminating that and other important programs for our children. i want to talk about the pell grant. i agree with your proposal to support career and technical education, but disagree on how you are going about it. as you know, the pell grant is the cornerstone of it were national commitment to make higher education accessible and affordable, but the purchasing power of pell grant's has significantly dropped over the years, covering only about 30% of the cost of college today. slashes pell grant and does not take into consideration rising costs and inflation. you are expanding the pool of eligible applicants by opening pell grant to short-term programs. financeou hope to
the additional demand on the program given that you provide no additional funds for the likely increase in pell grants? secretary devos: congresswoman, things for the question. the proposal, congress may well decide to expand the pell funding. our proposal is to continue to hold pell level but acknowledging that many students that might opt to take a short-term certification program may do so in lieu of a more traditional longer-term program, which in fact could probably be less costly to both the students and ultimately the taxpayer. we are looking forward and happy to work with you to set up those kinds of parameters and would welcome the opportunity. ms. roybal-allard: ok. i would suggest that you will not get enough students to switch from whatever profession they are seeking that needs a
four-year degree to take the shorter-term, so i'm hoping that be i'm sure that we will putting more money into the pell grant program. one second. i will move on to my next question. for the third year in a row your budget proposal has called for complete elimination of the title for a program. stating that it is ineffective. -- duplicative and ineffective. this is the same program that your department repeatedly
touts as offering local control and flexibility to districts and even goes so far as to suggest using these program funds to improve social, emotional learning and school climate and student safety as recommended in the report from the federal commission on school safety. that you cochaired. so why are you ignoring your reports own recommendation and calling for the elimination of a program that for thousands of districts across the country is the only flexible funding available for things like music, pe, stem and mental health services, counseling and violence prevention? sec. devos: thanks for that question, congresswoman. we have proposed this particular program elimination because it has been very thinly spread and has not been shown to be particularly effective at any particular thing. but with regard to school safety initiatives, the administration budget proposal broadly between the four departments that are
touched by school safety issues is proposing $700 million specifically around -- to support recommendations from the school safety commission report. the department of ed budget includes $200 million, $100 million of which would be for supporting mental health and social and emotional learning initiatives at the school level at the local level. and the -- at the local level. and the balance of it for helping schools to do emergency planning and assessment and take proactive steps to really prevent any acts of violence per . rep. roybal-allard: so you actually disagree with your own department recommendation and the commission that you cochaired? sec. devos: no, not at all. in fact we think the proposal of the budget really helps get after some of the things that the commission's report recommended and helps support those initiatives.
rep. roybal-allard: in your testimony you stated the following, and i quote, students may be better served by being in larger classes is by hiring fewer teachers a district or , state can better compensate those who have demonstrated high quality and outstanding results. end of quote. this is contrary to decades of long-standing credible research like the student teacher achievement ratio that actually recommended on average be 15:1.eacher ratio what evidence based research do you have to back your statement? sec. devos: well, that must be in my written testimony. and i would just comment to the fact that given, given education freedom initiatives, there are different kinds of environments in which students learn well and some students can learn better with larger classes with more students to collaborate
with, to learn with. rep. roybal-allard: can you cite what research are you using? sec. devos: there is plenty of research that will come undergird the fact that mandating a specific class- size doesn't provide doesn't yield resorts and i would be happy if you submit a question for the record i would be happy to do so. thank you madam chair and thank you madam secretary for being here today. i want to go back to the school safety report. within one section of that school safety report your commission did recommend and we discussed earlier, resending the 2014 guidance entitled rethink school discipline guidance, is that correct? sec. devos: yes, that is correct. rep. clark: you as secretary of education, you went ahead and rescinded that in january of 2019, is that correct? sec. devos: the timing might be
about right come in my be -- rep. roybal-allard: -- rep. clark: but you did resend that in your official role, is that right? sec. devos: that's correct. rep. clark: and your role, the guidance was well-meaning to address the fact that like boys are three times more likely to be suspended and black girls are six times as likely to be suspended. but the report goes on to say although well-meaning, you believe, the commission believes, headed by you that the guidance resulted in teachers in schools not really carrying out discipline because they were afraid of federal action, is that correct? sec. devos: that has been yes, that has been actually spoken to me from a number of teachers. rep. clark: ok. then you went on to layout in your report that although not specifically called for in the guidance that there was a concern that the commission had that this guidance was creating quotas or certainly pressure to
have quotas, meaning that you would look and have to discipline white students at the same rate you are disciplining black students however unfairly, is that what you mean by quotas? that you would actually look and discipline white students to make sure it was equal with the discipline of black students? sec. devos: congresswoman, if what you're asking is about whether students can or should be treated differently -- rep. clark: that is what you wrote in your report that this was a concern that schools feel pressured to have discipline quotas. that was in your report. sec. devos: every student is an individual and -- rep. clark: yes. but that was quotas the concern is that correct? sec. devos: that has been contested by the discipline guidance. rep. clark: right. and you put it in your report. that was a concern. and you question the legal validity of the guidance on a serious misprint serious
disparate impact. so here is where my questions for you come in. at the base of all of this, you wrote in your report the racial gap in suspension, you cite a study and say "the racial gap in suspensions was completely accounted for by a measure of the prior problem behavior of the student, a finding never before reported in literature." from your report, "this research undermines the core proposition in disparate impact theory that statistical disparity necessarily demonstrate the classroom teachers and administrators are motivated by race when disciplining students." that's a quote from your report. so i looked at the underlying research. here is what it shows. it says and i am quoting from the report, prior problem
behavior accounts for the racial gap in school suspension that you cite in your school safety commission report. this report says, studies suggest that school discipline -- disciplinary rates may reflect the problematic behaviors of black youth. problem behaviors that are imported into schools and into classrooms. they go on to say difference in race suspension between racial groups appear to be a function of differences in problem behaviors. that emerge early in life, remain relatively stable over time, and then materialize in the classroom. this report that you cited and based as your theory, concludes by saying the association between school suspensions and
blacks and whites reflects long-standing behavioral differences between youth. that's the research that you are citing in your report. in concluding that apparently that it is not racial discrimination in discipline but there are some characteristics of black children that from this report start early in life, well before they get to the classroom. and in fact the author of the report has many other writings where he says it is the liberal fantasy that poverty and racism play into high rates of incarceration and criminal behavior. so my question for you is, when you talk about children shall be treated individually, what are you saying? are you saying here when you quote this research that the
problem really is that black children are just more of a discipline problem? because that's the research you have quoted in your report. sec. devos: congresswoman, i said it before and i will state again, no student, no child should be treated or disciplined differently based on their skin color and race. rep. clark: your report agrees with that, they just say that by the very basis of being a black child you are more likely to be a discipline problem. that is what the study says. that you quoted in your report and said that's why we now think it may not be motivated by race, black children are just plain old more disruptive in the classroom. how did you come to that conclusion? sec. devos: children should never ever be discriminated against. rep. clark: well, i hope you take these words to heart.
and repeal your sighting of this research. citing of this research. >> congressman graves. rep. graves: madam chair, madam secretary. good to see you. first let me thank you for your many years of commitment to children's education, your personal heart and spirit that you have shown is amazing. and i want to thank you for that, i know it has been a driving commitment of your self and family for many years. and thank you for taking it to a public sector, not an easy place to go but you are willing to do that and didn't have to but you stepped up and thank you. to change directions a little bit, and i know you have plans for the agency and days ahead and we are talking budgets and such but i know you briefly talk -- talked a little bit about i guess the educational freedom scholarship program. maybe you could go a little
deeper that because i think that gets to the heart of what you are trying to do in this department and that is to make sure that children have access to education that touches them where they are in life as best as it can and take it to another place that betters them and their families in the future. can you tell us about the because i have familiarity in some ways -- with georgia has an educational tax credit that similar to that and how does that work and how will children benefit from this? sec. devos: thanks, congressman, for that question. just to elaborate a little bit more on what an education freedom scholarship tax credit could mean, we are talking about a federal tax credit that states could elect to participate in or not. so georgia could decide to participate in that federal pool of tax credit funds. and implement different program than what they already have, they could augment the one they already have, the tax credit scholarship program there.
and really think creatively about how to address the unique needs of students in georgia. and just thinking about some of the lines of questioning here today, and some of the students that i have met that have benefited from being able to take, to have school choice and take advantage of opportunity like that, i think about denisha meriwether, a young woman who failed the third grade twice and she grew up in jacksonville florida area. failed third grade twice, constantly got into fights at school, had a mom who was not able to really be a full mom for her. thankfully she had a godmother who came and found this tax credit scholarship, florida tax credit scholarship opportunity and denisha will tell you today she wasn't in that school, that faith-based school that her god mom found for her, not even two weeks and she was on a
completely different trajectory. she became the first in her family to graduate high school. she has earned a college degree and a masters degree. and she is now working with us at the department of education to continue to talk about advancing these opportunities for kids. i think about so many students today who are stuck in school that just aren't working for them. and to give them the kind of freedom and opportunity that the education freedom scholarship tax credit would allow is really inspiring to me and i would hope that those whose minds are close to that opportunity today would allow them to be open a little bit and just talk to a couple of the students who have been able to take, been able to make those choices and to find the right place for them. and every child should have those kinds of opportunities. rep. graves: thank you for your
willingness to propose that i because that is a bold proposal and i know there's always criticism and objectives oftentimes a new concept but it does work. i don't know of an example where a student has gotten a worse education as result of making an -- taking an opportunity such as this and in fact some cases and my wife is a schoolteacher you know, pre-k so i come from that background too. but unfortunately it is not the fault of the student, in fact sometimes they are tethered to a mailbox, they go to school where basedmailbox is and not on what's best for them and their family and their spot or their needs. in essence. so thank you for your willingness to do that. as we go through, i know we have more questions that i would like to take it all the way to the full spectrum of college and how we can better prepare students understanding the true cost of college and what is the cost benefit of going to a school
versus what the degree might deliver on an income base, and how can we better assist students in making college decisions based on facts and finances, and true cost? so when we come back run i would like to talk about that. sec. devos: thank you, congressman, and thank you to your wife for the great work she does. >> thank you, we are going to embark on a second round, the time limit will be three minutes. -- for each of us. ok. >> the department of education requires a letter of credit from an institution if it determines the serious risk to taxpayers . this includes things like the risk of precipitous school closure. a couple of questions, if the -- did the department of education give back part of the art institute of pittsburgh a for-profit college, a letter of credit so they could continue to
operate? $2 million, yes or no? sec. devos: congresswoman, i am not familiar with that specific issue with that specific school or cut more broadly, yes, we do hold -- rep. delauro: there was a $2 million give back to the school which you should check on given that the art institute of pittsburgh recently announced it is going to close anyway. the end of the march, it will. i need an answer to the question, why did the department do this and what happened to the money? you appear not to know anything but i would ask you to please check on it and get us an answer quickly. as to why it was done and where is the money? where is the money? sec. devos: thank you congressman, i will be happy -- rep. delauro: there's testimony from the department, the
inspector general for audit, this is about federal student aid management of student loan services. i also find it interesting that all of your commentary even some of the folks on the other side of the aisle and localities and are to have the jurisdiction to go after and to take on education and that's where it belongs except when it comes to protecting our kids in our borrowers, then we don't want to look at the state and what they're doing and the loan services, we want federal law to preempt it. that being said, in particular we print evidence of how the department failed to consider a services noncompliance with federal law and past performance. where not these ideas included in the memos which you rescinded following your first three months of secretary of education. sec. devos: congresswoman, we have as you know embarked on nextgen -- rep. delauro: i understand it. i know about next gen.
i do know a lot about it. sec. devos: if you would allow me to talk about it a moment -- rep. delauro: i want to know why, that's not my question, my question is why were the michelin king memos, which were specifically laid out to address services noncompliance to federal law past performance, i asked the question, you rescinded the requirement as stated, servicing contractor should comply with federal and state law, taking any necessary steps to support oversight by federal or state agencies regulators or law enforcement officials. did you rescinded that? sec. devos: congresswoman, let me just say that we take, loan servicing and the requirements thereof -- we are continuing to enforce. rep. delauro: my time is up, loan services, they are getting away with putting a grave risk on students. >> thank you, madam chair. i only have a short time so i went to get two things on the
record and then ask a question. one i agree and i really want to thank you for this freedom scholarship initiative. i think that's a really important thing and i agree very much with the idea of injecting choice and freedom into the system and both students and frankly donors, the kind of flexibility you think would help the system and allow us to meet individual means. i do want to go on record and you and i have had this discussion, i disagree on the elimination of gear up. it produced 5 million college graduates for united states and these are young people that usually come not so young sometimes come from backgrounds they may not have been able to make it and i know in my state these are two really important programs, i have the discussion recently with the chancellor of higher education in a college president and they think this is really helped student population and we have a lot of which is a lot of first-generation ones. one thing i do want to ask about
and was pretty excited about, you've got -- and this works with the apprenticeship program have a pre-apprenticeship program. $60 million for that. can you tell me what the difference is and how you would define a pre-apprenticeship program versus an apprenticeship and how that would work out? sec. devos: so a pre-apprenticeship, first, thank you mr. cole, let me just comment on the treo thing. because i know while we have proposed combining europe and -- combining gear up and trio into one program and then a lesser amount for the trio program, but we also have proposed consolidating that into a state formula grant so that states have the opportunity to get some of these funds to institutions and to individuals that are more needy around this. what we found is that 95% of the competitive grants go to the same places and the same programs time after time and they don't necessarily help the students that are most in the.
-- most in need. so i'd like to talk with you more about that. rep. cole: we can have that dialogue another time. with regard to the pre-apprenticeship program. this proposal is to really start establishing apprenticeship programs that are outside of the registered more traditional sorts of apprenticeships that like building and trades apprenticeship program and this will allow us to allow employers and educators to work together on apprenticeship tracks and opportunities that are going to have a more expansive appeal and more relevant relevance to the -- more relevance to the market today. rep. cole: again this has a lot of appeal to me, i want to get a little clarity as we go forward over what the definition would be so we don't end up basically funding the same thing twice per -- the same thing twice. sec. devos: we would love to work with you on that to make sure that is -- rep. cole: my career tech people are very excited about these
proposals. thank you. rep. lowey: thank you again, madam secretary. the question before i turn to my question. looking at these numbers again, the total cuts of dept. of education to fy 2019 is $8.8 billion, 12.5%, i am curious if you could say yes, no, whatever, do you have any input, to mr. mulvaney are president trump ask you if you had those cuts should be made or should be rescinded and did you have any input? sec. devos: congresswoman, yes this was an ongoing discussion but let me just correct you and your numbers, the proposed cuts are i think you are also rolling $7.1 billion. in the rescission around tell -- around pell. rep. lowey: pretty important, don't you think? sec. devos: it is the pels surplus. the amount that continues to
accrue because not enough students are taking advantage of the pellprogram -- program, so the account accrued and it is essentially an accounting adjustment to resend part of the -- rep. lowey: madam secretary i will not get into that. because the hour is late. i wondered if you had any input knowing your commitment to education and your secretary of education and as mr. mulvaney said this is yours and this is yours? sec. devos: this is a process but let me say that it is only at the federal government and washington that we judge the quality and effectiveness of something by the amount of money we spend on it. i think we have to get past that notion. quality and effectiveness does not equate directly to dollars spent. rep. lowey: we could have a long discussion but in many of my schools, whether they get a pell grant or not, it does depend not
just on the specific criteria but whether there's enough money in the bank to pay for their pell grant and pay for the scholarship to help them get through a job in education at the same time. i'm not going to get into that again, i hope we can continue the discussion. what i want to ask you in the past week alone, to parkland -- two parkland school shooting survivors, the father of the sandy hook victim died by suicide. this came from the gun violence to schools and highlights the critical importance of mental health support in schools. while your budget request increase for school safety and activity proposes the elimination of the third year in a row of the $1.7 billion student support and academic enrichment grant program. in my -- program. in my judgment, interacting with
educators, you need programs like this and other important interventions that help keep community safe. can you just tell us how is the education department responding to this and has there been any outrage and has there been any support services and i have six seconds left. maybe you can answer it very quickly. sec. devos: let me say that i was heartbroken to hear about the students at parkland and we are certainly have been continual contact with them in around the immediate grants that we can make in the wake of the tragedy and will certainly be again this time. but the budget proposal does include funds and initiatives specifically to help schools elect to onboard social and emotional learning and mental health programs who really work -- to really work at ensuring prevention of these sorts of -- rep. lowey: my time is up. so $100 million spread out
across 50 states. rep. moolenaar: thank you madam chair and again, secretary devos thank you for answering questions and your patience with you know, sometimes not even getting a chance to answer the question you are asked and i appreciate all you have done. i want to ask you on your federal work study proposal, last year's budget you proposed reforms to the federal work study program and you've done that again this year. to better target the funding of low income recipients. i wonder if you could comment on why do we need, wisest federal -- why do the federal work-study program need these reforms and how does it assist low income students better and any other reforms in your budget to ensure that funds are best targeted to students who need the funds most? sec. devos: thanks, congressman. yes, we believe the federal
work-study program needs reform because the way the formula works today, very often those funds go to the most elite institutions not the ones that are really serving the students with the most need. so that is issue one. secondly, work-study as its -- as it is carried out today, often involves students working in the college bookstore or in the cafeteria, on campus programs. we have proposed to expand those options to allow students to potentially work with in an internship type apprenticeship type of opportunity with employers for whom they might ultimately move into a career with. we think that having relevant work opportunities for students will be very meaningful in their learning career and so that's part of our proposal as well. rep. moolenaar: i think that's a great idea.
i think it meets a short-term need as helping someone evaluate the future and what they might want to pursue long-term. what needs to happen to accomplish that, is that -- it legislative, is it something you can do, how do we accomplish that? sec. devos: it is part of the budget proposal so congress can, you all can discuss and take that up in your budget deliberations to allow the funds designated for that to be able to be used for those sorts of purposes. rep. moolenaar: thank you and one last question on the teacher mentors. can you talk about that because one of the things you here periodically is that teachers come into the profession and many leave in the first three years. is that something that this will help with that? sec. devos: good question, thanks for asking that. we believe that this is really a two track opportunity. for new young teachers just coming into the profession to
have a highly qualified, seasoned professional to come alongside them and help them walk through their first few years in the profession is a great opportunity for new teachers. for those who are established and want to continue to really expand their reach, and their ability to reach students, this gives them a really important career track and opportunity to do so and to continue to develop themselves and a career track for themselves. the best of the best, teaching young new teachers is a great combination and we should i think really embrace this wholeheartedly because it's ultimately going to be back to -- be best for students. rep. moolenaar: thank you and i yield back. rep. lee: thank you.
your budget proposal you require postsecondary institutions to use taxpayer funds and gets get in the game through student loan rick scott program. -- risk sharing program. this program is not quite defined in the budget. starting with black colleges and universities and minorities serving institution to roll a large number of low income students. the point of the higher education act was to increase access to postsecondary education and i want to ensure that as we move forward we moved to increased access but come -- but from the proposals we have seen there's a strong argument that this sharing -- that risk sharing can incentivize institutions only enroll those students of a certain means in an effort to not have to share in the risk of a student is unable to pay back their loans. so again it could negatively harm minority institutions and minority students. how do you describe your proposal, in the sense that it would not create a perverse incentive to not enroll low income students. in the second question i have,
you may need to get back to me is the congressional black caucus, we are deeply concerned about communications and advertising dollars from each agency. so i would like to know and you have $1 million for communications program in your budget, how this money is contracted out and in terms of the vendors, the media that you use to provide communication for the department of education in terms of minority women owned businesses and media so if you could get back to us with that. sec. devos: congresswoman coming yes, if you could submit that for the record we would be happy to respond on that one, i can't respond on that right now. as far as your first question and the proposal around risksharing, it is a very broad proposal. not defined at all yet. we look for to working with you to develop a more concrete approach to ensuring that institutions have some kind of commitment to the students they
are serving. i share your concern, we share your concern about ultimately impacting low income students and you know more high risk students disproportionately. i think that again we would look forward to working with you and talking to you about ensuring we don't, we don't ultimately come forward with a proposal that would negatively impact the students that most need to have the kind of access we are talking about. and with regard to hbcu, i want to say that this administration has a very strong commitment to continuing to support hbcus and their important work in our proposal, our budget proposal continues to find all of the -- to fund all of the hbcu activity at levels as appropriated in 2019. and so again in the context of reduced budget overall, i think it does demonstrate the commitment to these
institutions. rep. lee: thank you. we will get to you in writing the suggestions on how you can approach the risksharing program. sec. devos: thank you. rep. watson coleman: madam secretary, how we spend our money and propose to spend it is an absolutely mentioned of our as i look at this you said value. watson coleman? ok. >> congressman harris. rep. harris: thank you. they you very much, madam chair. madam secretary one of the things that i've noticed in the president's budget and one of the things was mentioned is the professional development and it's a different term the administration wants to take in. professional development. i liken it to the position, we do continue medical education
but is different for every person. every person is different stage in their training and different stage of their experience. and so one size fits a few approach doesn't work for that and i expect it doesn't work for professional development for teachers as well. can you review that eir program and what your proposal is for it and how it would change the way we deal with professional development? sec. devos: thanks, congressman. this is a really important initiative. i think that in our goal to really honor and respect the teaching profession and teachers, we want to give a couple of different tools to teachers specifically. and give them more freedom to be the best they can be. and the proposal that we put forward is a teacher voucher where teachers could pursue their professional development, customize it for their needs and continue to themselves develop and you know perhaps share with their peers what they have
learned but give them a lot more freedom in that development. i have talked with dozens, hundreds of teachers across the country and i hear repeatedly about you know with very few exceptions, the area of personally developing professionally developing is one that they deeply want to do and yet they have very few opportunities and very little latitude in how to do that. so we believe this is a really important proposal that we hope you will consider very seriously. rep. harris: why is it because you know, i have one of the studies that the national some -- national center for an education evaluation and regional system produced which was from the department of education. it looked at middle school mathematics and social development and i'm sure you are aware of the studies that show that you know we do these things for teachers and these things professional development but objectively, they just don't achieve the outcome. why is it you think it will recurrently doing and this is
obviously important, mathematics is an important thing, we want to make sure teachers teach better, why don't these programs currently work? sec. devos: i think very often they are one-size-fits-all approach or one dictated by the district or the school building and there's very little latitude given to the teacher themselves as to whether or not this is the -- of this particular program to which they are assigned to go and learn from is going to actually help them in their profession and in their particular teaching style. i think being able to choose and customize themselves is going to really allow them to really grow professionally in a way they have not been able to before. rep. harris: thank you. madam chair, i would like to move the objection that the study be entered into the record. i yield back. >> congresswoman watson called.
rep. watson cole: are you sure? >> yes. rep. watson cole: thank you, madam secretary. first of all want to say something about this rule that was rescinded. this was not supported by any of the civil rights community and it seemed to me that was a very viable entity to consider before you rolled that rollback. number two, you have, you had the major advocate for education in this country, admonished us in your statement for giving you too much money. so i just find that absolutely incredible. number three, i looked at where your priorities are at the same time i looked at where your decreases and program eliminations are and it is very poignant to me that those programs that are particularly hurt address the minority population, the poorer population, the teachers in the schools that are struggling
more, the trio program and programs that help young people get prepared for college and all of those programs address the children and the situations most in need and there is more than $7 billion cut in your budget from each one of those programs. and finally, i am going to give you the copy that i have of my attorney general's letter so that you will have it in your possession now and be able to have your staff who have it, respond in a more expeditious manner. i guess really finally is that you have eliminated a $200 billion teacher development program and replaced it with a
$2 billion program -- $2 million program? a $2 billion program you have eliminated replacing it with a $2 million program to do the things you said would give teachers an opportunity for development, personal development, innovative development, etc. it just doesn't fly, it just doesn't fly. it seems to me that a word you use a lot in your discussion here today was about freedom and from my perspective of what i heard freedom is not equal in your mind. i yield back. >> congressman clarke. no, congressman graves. rep. graves: yes, ma'am. madam secretary thank you again we are sort of wrapping up. . i have been here a little while this afternoon and this morning and i hear a little criticism about spending decisions you have made. might i just point out to the committee on your behalf that
you are complying with the law. the law says you can only spend so much money and until congress changes that number you have to make tough decisions and tough choices. i might refer to it as a little bit hypocritical criticism because i've yet to see a comparison budget i the other -- by the other side presented that would counter and show their spending priorities as it complies with current law as well. until then i would suggest a restrain from some of the criticism until they can compare it appropriately. back to talking about college students. i am a father of two college students and we have been going through that process of making decisions over the past year or two and it is difficult to compel a student who has a desire and aspiration to go to a certain university with a certain degree in mind and program and try to convey to them that your potential income when you come out may not match the expense of what you are going to incur because there is an expense. what can we do or what is your department doing to help educate
very educated students who are going into very demanding career potential potential careers in the future that the expense of a quarter of $1 million loan to get a degree that it might be difficult to pay that off in the future, how do we get that message to them and help them make informed decisions? maybe is a disclosure or it might be done in real estate, you understand you are signing an agreement. you understand this might be the salary but this is the cost in here is your return on investment. sec. devos: thanks for that question, congressman. this is an area we have been very focused on making progress on behalf of both students that are the customers and taxpayers. the next generation of in federal student aid is taking a very antiquated complicated framework that has been patched together over the last couple decades and bringing it into the
21st century with astructure -- with a structure that is going to be world-class experience for the student, the customer. today you can complete your federal student aid form on your smartphone through the my student aid app. very soon we will be adding really important information to that through the college scorecard. we will have program level data by institution so students can look if they are prospectively deciding between a number of institutions and a number of programs that they are thinking about pursuing. they will be able to find earnings data at the program level from that institution so it will give them a really important tool they can use when they decide to take on that student debt to determine if that program will ultimately pay and ultimately going to be worth the investment they are talking about making. rep. graves: do you anticipate
this tool will indicate the interest expense, the payment structure if a loan were to be taken out and how long it would take? because i feel like parents are having to do a lot of that work on their own and students get to their college career to enter into their next career and then they realize i have a lot of they realize i have a lot of work to do but i had other dreams, i wanted to start a family or buy a home and now i can't, i wish i had known four years ago. sec. devos: i think in general students need to have a lot more tools at their fingertips and they need to become much more financially literate as they make these decisions about their higher education pursuits we can -- pursuits. we can and will be providing a lot of data and a lot of tools for them to know and understand what those implications are. we have proposed in this budget simplification of loan
repayment, income driven repayment programs which would be capped at 12.5%. i think another area that is ripe for exploration in which mitch daniels has instituted a -- in a really important way at purdue university -- >> i'm sorry. we are one minute and a half over. i apologize. ms. clark? clark: thank you, madam chair. madam secretary last year you came before us and in an answer to my question about a proposed budget cut to the student support and academic enrichment grant. since you made that budget proposal in 2018 we had had the shooting in parkland and i know that you were just putting together this commission that has now made recommendations that mental health treatment be
provided and that we hire more school counselors and social workers recognizing these services are most effective when they are school-based. you said when i asked you about it in light of what had transpired "i support congress's re-addressing this and looking this budget item" because you said you supported " ensuring schools have the resources that they need to keep kids safe." i understand your testimony today that the $3.8 billion in cuts you have proposed is somehow squared with $100 million you put in your budget to go to mental health, could you explain your thinking and has what you said to me last year changed? sec. devos: thanks, congresswoman, for the question about the title for a proposed
elimination from the budget. i mentioned earlier the fact that this program has been very broad and thinly spread. it has not been designated specifically for school safety activities -- rep. clark: there was $234 million, correct? to safe and healthy school activities? sec. devos: which were again, very broad. we believe the budget proposal as we submitted it today is one that really helps target specific needs of states and local districts -- rep. clark: can you really help make -- this week we have already mentioned the suicides of the parkland students which i share your heartbreak over that, but it puts such a glaring light on the need for mental health services. what i hear you saying is with less than half of what the title iv funds somehow you think that will do a better job because those funds are two broad is
is that what you are saying? take into: let's also account the fact that there are other specific activities including mental health services in the budgets of hhs and doj and dhs and together $700 million specifically for school safety activities and there is actually more in those departments -- rep. clark: i am hearing or testimony that yes reducing it by half will do it, can you just answer for me something that was raised. is any of that funding of the two edge dollars be allowed to purchase guns? -- of the $200 million allowed to purchase guns? sec. devos: that is not the intention of the proposal. rep. clark: is that i know? is that a no? sec. devos: that is not the intention of the proposal. it is for mental health -- rep. clark: is that a no?
sec. devos: that will be totally up to this body to decide conclusively one way or another. it is not the intention of our proposal. >> i will close. i am prepared to close madam chair. madam secretary, first i want to thank you. i hope it is well known how many years of service you have spent and frankly to try to make sure folks without access got access to good quality education long before you took this current job and you certainly didn't need this job. you serve without pay and you travel at your own expense. i suspect you have in front of you in terms of being more enjoyable but you chose this and you chose it because you care about the young people and you care about educational opportunities. we may have occasional differences and i don't think anybody could doubt your commitment to the job and willingness to sacrifice time
and forgo the perks of the job. i think there are very few perks of the job that you have and i want to thank you for that. i think the mere fact that you stayed here longer than we normally go because you wanted to answer everyone's questions and concerns and present a case, think that is very important. i think i ought to note too well we've had differences there are some places we can work on together and it seems there was universal support of this idea of short-term pell grants that you mentioned. there is strong support for investments in career and vocational education and obviously you share a lot of priorities. i think my friend mr. graves pointed out you do have to live within a constrained budget. you are writing a budget to the law. we think at some point it is a layer of the agreement but we don't know that and you don't know that and it would be unwise for you to present a budget. even in that constrained budget
you made sure there were no cuts title i,. -- no cuts. those are our vote most vulnerable students and i think with the dollars you have that you put those dollars where they reach people that are at the greatest risk of falling through the cracks in our educational system and i want to thank you for that. again, thank you for your service and thank you for giving us extra time here today to ask tough questions. i look forward to continuing to work with you as we go forward. thank you, madam chair. thank you very much. and thank you very much madam secretary for being here and for staying on and continuing to answer questions. i would like to say i see a sense of frustration on our side of the aisle and that is quite frankly frustration from often times the inability to get
answers to questions as it was demonstrated here today. i started out and i don't pull any punches. this budget in my view is cruel, i think it is reckless and it is a 12% cut. it hurts middle-class families and working families. and it is of concern to me, and again as i laid out, i would hope it is of concern to you. why on your watch as a secretary of education do you want to be complicit in shutting off public education opportunities? that is the way i see this and my colleague talked about criticisms that have to do with a budget, no we all work and are used to working within a budget framework but it is where you place your resources, what are your values? what are your priorities?
that is what defines a budget and that is what of the concerns to all of us. i just want to clarify a couple of things. with regard to charters being public, it is hard to compare charters to public education as we know it because far too often what we see are charters siphoning away dollars from public schools. they are operated privately and they do lack transparency and we expect that transparency from our publicans occasions. we apparently don't with regard to charters and i want to say to you this morning or this afternoon, find the billion dollars. find that billion dollars that was there. my colleague who is now gone and you had an exchange with regard to international comparisons. other countries blow us out of the water with investments in
early childhood, wraparound services which we know pay off in serious dividends. we have one of the lowest rates -- lowest enrollment rates in early childhood education. let me just say the hhs budget proposes to eliminate preschool development grants. we have level funded headstart. we take on most 15-year-old in our school system. other countries don't do that. they take the highest achievers. so when you look -- you have to take that into consideration. the national assessment of of progress has showed a large gains which we should be proud of for children of color over the past three decades. we have made and we continue to denigrate our public education system which leads me to the view that the decision is to
privatize it. i'm sorry you didn't answer the mismanagementhe of the agency, but in regard to short-term pell there are some pieces around that. what you failed to do is to talk about defining high-quality. we need to have guardrails so we don't wind up in a pell grant program open to fraud, waste and abuse. we need to have programs that look at whether or not they are a good return on our investment for students and for the federal government. with regard to next-generation the requirements can take the necessary steps to prevent oversight by federal or state agencies, regulators or law enforcement officials. you rescinded the requirement around strengthening transparency to expand the publication of aggregate data on
student loan and service performances. that would have required the department of education public service or level data. none of these rescinded provisions are currently part of the departments next gen effort. you said and you discussed that these are just proposals. i'm relieved. i am relieved they are because -- just proposals because the damage your budget would have -- would inflict on children and families. i look forward to working with my colleagues across the aisle put aect cuts and forward-looking agenda to improve the lives of american families. we have strived to do that over the last several years on this committee.
we will be reviewing what had been proposed and you can be assured and i hope that we are going to reject much of what is here as we have in the past because the center of the department of education is the 90% of our kids in public education. you need to be focused like a laser on their opportunities and their future and yes test -- look at innovation. test whether or not it is good. and be prepared to say no when it is not working. thank you. let major draw this hearing to a close. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] announcer: on newsmakers, democratic congressman darrell -- gerald connolly talks about the molar report, border security, president trump's declaration of emergency powers, the budget, and u.s. foreign policy.
newsmakers today at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. q&a,ncer: tonight on supreme court reporter joan dispute get the talks about her latest book "the chief." a biography of chief justice john roberts. >> john mack -- john roberts controls however he votes now that anthony kennedy has gone, he will determine the law of the land. the liberals want him to come over inch over a little bit, but the conservatives are trying to hold him back, where he always was. meanwhile, you have this chief justice declaring there is no such thing as an obama judge, there is no such thing as a trump judge. he wants to project a bench that is not political, when they all have their agendas of sorts. announcer: tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a.
tonight on afterwards, former trump advisor george papadopoulos details his role in the 2016 presidential campaign in his book "deep state afterwards, former trump advisor georgetarget, how i got caught e crosshairs of the plot to bring down president trump." he is interviewed by wall street journal justice department reporter arena vision and off of. >> i was actively trying to leverage what i thought were these man's connections to russia, because i believe there was -- it was in the interest of the campaign for candidate trump to meet with vladimir putin. >> you believed it was high marry objective? >> yes. by the time i joined at the campaign, donald trump have been espousing the need to work with russia at a geopolitical level, to combat isis. announcer: watch afterwards at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two.
on capitol hill next week, the house will consider reauthorization of the violence against women act, which expired in february. it aims to prevent abuse and provide resources for victims and includes a provision on domestic violence and firearms. it is also possible that members will take up a senate passed resolution to end the u.s. military involvement in yemen. onthe senate, work continues a bill that would provide nearly $13 billion in aid for areas affected by natural disasters. also, a resolution that which art in the amount of time the senate considers certain nominations. watch the house live on c-span and the senate live on >> once, take it was simply three giant networks and a government supported service called pbs. networkd 1979, a small with an unusual name will not a big idea.
let viewers decide all on their own what was important to them. c-span opened the doors to washington policymaking for all to see. bringing you unfiltered content from congress and beyond. in the age of power to the people, this was true people power. in the 40 years since, the landscape is clearly changed. there is no monolithic media, broadcasters, youtube stars are a thing. c-span's big idea is more relevant today than ever. no government money supports c-span. it's nonpartisan coverage of washington is funded as a public service by your cable -- cable and satellite providers on television and online. c-span is your unfiltered view of government so you can make up your own mind. secretary of state mike pompeo was on capitol hill, testifying on the president's 2020 budget request for the department. this is one of two congressional hearings. the secretary appeared up