Andy Levin

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I would just point out that the grants in Title II do not have mandatory partners. They require partners to the extent practicable in a given situation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Mrvan), a member of the Committee on Education and Labor, and a new champion for workers in this House of Representatives.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jones), another new and valued member on the Committee on Education and Labor.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time remains.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Manning), another new member of the Committee on Education and Labor and a native Michigander.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), who has been fighting for workers and small businesses in this House for decades.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), a champion of the economic development of workers and of businesses at the local, State, and national level.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, as I have listened to the debate back and forth, I feel like it hasn't covered much of what is so exciting about this bill. When I was the chief workforce officer of the State of Michigan, it was during the implosion of the auto industry and then the Great Recession. Michigan had the highest unemployment rate of any State for 49 consecutive months. It was in that difficult circumstance that I had to try to help Michigan workers train and get new skills for new opportunities. There was a Senator from Illinois around that time; his name was Barack Obama. And he got a piece of legislation passed that said that States could use half a percent of their SAFETEA-LU money, their money for highway construction, to help train the workforce of the future, more women, more people of color, more poor people. So, I worked with the apprenticeship directors of the highway industry, with people advocating for more opportunities for people of color, and we created pre-apprenticeship programs that helped new people get apprenticeships and a road to the middle class in this country by building our roads. Mr. Speaker, the point is, we had to do that on our own. The registered apprenticeship system didn't offer us guidance. It certainly didn't offer us funding. This bill does so much to modernize and open up our apprenticeship system. It facilitates pre-apprenticeship programs. It facilitates youth apprenticeship programs. It specifically encourages innovation and the birthing of new apprenticeship programs in a wide array of new industries. Mr. Speaker, despite the rhetoric, it is quite bipartisan. Mr. Speaker, I thank some Representatives who have done a lot to help bring this bill to fruition, including Representatives Norcross, Brian Fitzpatrick, Suzanne Bonamici, David McKinley, and Don Bacon, all of whom have provided critical leadership. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 85, I rise to offer amendments en bloc No. 1.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of en bloc amendment No. 1, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. These amendments will add ``ethnicity'' alongside race and gender to the definition of ``nontraditional apprenticeship population''; Expand outreach to title I schools and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families programs to promote awareness of apprenticeship opportunities; Clarify State plans' inclusion of nontraditional apprenticeship industries and occupations; Add childcare to the range of transition assistance options included for formerly incarcerated people in apprenticeships; Add ``media and entertainment'' and ``early childhood, elementary, and secondary education'' to the list of nontraditional apprenticeship industries eligible for support; Make Job Corps Centers eligible for funding to run apprenticeship programs; Ensure that States facilitate the exchange of best practices between grant participants; And clarify the type of national, regional, and industry intermediaries eligible for intermediary grants. Mr. Speaker, these amendments make meaningful improvements to the bill, and I ask my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this en bloc. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Delaware (Ms. Blunt Rochester).

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crow).

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. Bush), my new colleague.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), my esteemed colleague.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from North Carolina for continuing to educate me on the process of the House as I learn. I am reminded by Representative Bush's amendment of my experience attending graduations from pre-apprenticeship programs and seeing whole families turn out, seeing people turn out with their children to celebrate the graduation from a pre-apprenticeship program that allows people, returning citizens, people with disabilities, people who have been excluded from economic opportunity before, to get into an apprenticeship that can transform their lives, that can rocket them into a middle-class life with a great wage and great benefits. Mr. Speaker, I urge everyone to support these en bloc amendments, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of amendments en bloc No. 2. These amendments will add the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in the Department of Justice as an agency the Office of Apprenticeship shall coordinate with to ensure alignment of apprenticeship programs and mentorship programs for individuals who are exiting the juvenile justice system. They will add agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting, computer science, environmental protection and conservation, and hospitality and tourism to the list of nontraditional apprenticeship industries and occupations supported by this bill. They will add opportunities to partner with veterans service organizations throughout the bill, increase flexibility and innovation by allowing demonstration projects in the national apprenticeship system, and direct the Office of Apprenticeship to cooperate with the Department of Justice and State departments of corrections to promote access to apprenticeship programs for individuals in correctional institutions and to assist returning citizens to transition into apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeships. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support this bloc of amendments, the majority of which are bipartisan, that will strengthen this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Kilmer).

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Pappas).

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, I would just like to point out something that I also think has not been emphasized enough in this discussion, which is how cost-effective this bill is--these amendments only make it more so--and how it will improve the fiscal situation of the United States. We will have more tax revenue when more workers earn more money and get more good jobs. We will have less people who need public assistance. This bill not only provides tremendous opportunities for American workers to earn and learn and avoid debt while they are getting their credentials to get great jobs, but also really it is a very prudent and wise investment on behalf of the American taxpayers. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 85, I rise to offer amendments en bloc No. 3.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of amendments en bloc No. 3. These amendments will ensure the availability of user-friendly materials, including materials in diverse languages, as part of the outreach required by this bill. They will add a representative of the Federal Communications Commission as an ex officio member of the National Advisory Committee on Apprenticeships. They will strengthen States' efforts to ensure that low-income individuals have equal access to apprenticeships. They will clarify the inclusion of renewable energy in the list of nontraditional apprenticeship industries and occupations supported in this bill. They will promote access to grants made under this bill for minority- , veteran-, and women-owned businesses. They will increase support for apprenticeship hubs and workforce development organizations that support nontraditional populations and dislocated workers. They will increase the ability of pre-apprenticeship programs to offer stipends to participants. And they will encourage employers to participate in apprenticeship programs that target individuals with language barriers. Again, Madam Speaker, just reading the list of these wonderful amendments offered by our colleagues shows the spirit of innovation and outreach that this bill represents. I urge you to support this bloc of amendments that will strengthen the bill. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Strickland).

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, the tired rhetoric about big labor, big labor, big labor, the organizations that workers create and pay for themselves to advocate their interests; yes, there is a lot of support for this bill from the labor movement. This bill is also endorsed by our mayors, by the National League of Cities. It is also endorsed by our community colleges, their national associations. It is also endorsed by multiple industry associations, including associations representing areas that don't have a lot of apprenticeships that hope to have more. And it is endorsed by many equity organizations such as the National Urban League. I also want to point out something else. No company or group of companies has to register their program. They are perfectly free, in this land of the free, to set up a training program, to pay for it themselves, to partner with labor organizations or colleges, to even use the word apprenticeship. Nobody has to register their apprenticeship. They are free to do whatever they want. This is about the Federal Government developing and nurturing training programs that we can proudly say meet high standards to give real opportunities to preserve these kinds of statistics we are talking about: People who complete an apprenticeship earning an average of $70,000 a year; 94 percent of people who complete apprenticeships getting good jobs. Also, some of my colleagues keep saying that all registered apprenticeships are controlled by the Federal Government. That is simply not true. Half of the States have State apprenticeship agencies, including the great State of North Carolina. In this bill, we codify their important and autonomous role and, for the first time ever, we provide annual funding because States have been so successful at expanding apprenticeships through Department of Labor grants. Again, for the first time, we streamline the registration process and create an in-the-box apprenticeship program to make it easier for small and medium-sized businesses to get in this game. Madam Speaker, this bill is such a wonderful improvement on an already wonderful job training program. I urge everyone to support these en bloc amendments, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment changes the word ``and'' to ``or,'' as my colleague from Arkansas pointed out, and it may seem like a small change. But, instead, it inadvertently could take away the employers' seat at the table for apprenticeship grant partnerships. Let me explain why. Although my Republican colleague likely introduced this amendment to ensure that apprenticeship grantees do not have to partner with labor unions, the unintended consequence of this amendment is that it also ensures that applicants would not have to partner with an industry or sector partnership at the expense of only partnering with a union. Those in support of this amendment may not realize that nothing about this amendment prevents partnerships with labor organizations as industry or sector partnerships, as defined in the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, or WIOA, require three key stakeholders: Representatives of multiple businesses or employers, including small and medium-sized employers, labor representatives, and education or training programs. Any way you slice it, this amendment does not actually meet the Republican goal of attacking labor unions but, instead, attacks small and medium-sized employers that could be part of these grant programs. At a time when small and medium-sized businesses across this country are struggling to get back on their feet, thanks to the mismanagement of this pandemic by the Trump administration, the last thing we need to do is take away their ability to benefit fully from the apprenticeship grants that are part of this bill. I would urge my colleague to withdraw this shortsighted amendment and ensure that we are doing everything we can to help small and medium- sized businesses and education partners have a seat at the table for these apprenticeship grants. And if he does not, I would urge my colleagues to support small businesses and vote ``no'' on this amendment. And finally, let me just say that I think my colleague eloquently explained the situation where the practicable language was written for. If there aren't any unions around you are not going to be able to partner with unions, and so it is really not a problem. So this amendment doesn't do what it is intended to do. It is harmful, and I urge people to oppose it. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, let me just explain a little more for folks at home who may not be obviously reading all of the details of this, the many pages of this bill, what we are talking about. This is about who is eligible to apply for grants, certain grants under this bill; and it says that to be eligible to apply for a grant under this title an eligible entity shall demonstrate a partnership with two or more of the following, and then it lists quite a number of different groups that they can partner with, State and local workforce development boards, education training providers, State apprenticeship agencies, Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations, industry partnerships, Governors, labor organizations, community-based organizations, two or more, two or more. And then it says these words: To the extent practicable--a qualified intermediary; and to the extent practicable, it shall be part of an industry or sector partnership and partner with a labor or joint labor- management organization. That is all it says. And the idea of changing that ``and'' to ``or'' would fundamentally change it. It would reduce the level of collaboration, and it would possibly eliminate the industry or sector partnership from the grant application or a labor organization. But since WIOA requires the labor organizations, it is not going to do what they think it does. It is a bad idea. It is not well crafted. I urge my colleagues to oppose it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, first, I include in the Record a letter from the Manufacturing Institute in support of the bill. Manufacturing Institute, February 2, 2021. Hon. Bobby Scott, Chairman of Ed & Labor Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon Brian Fitzpatrick, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Scott and Representative Fitzpatrick: On behalf of The Manufacturing Institute (MI), the workforce development and education partner of the National Association of Manufacturers, I am writing to express our support of H.R. 477, the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021. Manufacturers' top challenge continues to be the ability to attract and retain a qualified workforce, as noted in the NAM's Quarterly Manufacturers Outlook Survey. At the end of 2020, there were nearly 500,000 open jobs in manufacturing. The current health crisis in our country has left millions without jobs and exacerbated the need for individuals to receive training for the careers that are available now and in the future. Registered Apprenticeship programs are one tool that can be utilized to support the business community in closing the skills gap and helping individuals enter a rewarding career. The National Apprenticeship Act of 2021, in addition to Congresswoman Slotkin's (D-Ml-8) amendment, addresses many of the challenges that manufacturers have long experienced in the Registered Apprenticeship system by streamlining the registration and approval process and providing a more direct means of support for the companies and education partners that wish to create or expand Registered Apprenticeship programs. The National Apprenticeship Act of 2021 improves an established model of training and work-based learning that can help to close the skills gap that manufacturers face. We appreciate the bi-partisan agreement that has been reached on this bill and we support its passage. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carolyn Lee, Executive Director.