Linda McMahon Trembles As Mark Takano Highlights Her Incompetence In Tense House Hearing

[0:01] I thank the gentlelady, and I recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Tucano. [0:06] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good to see you again, Madam Secretary. [0:09] Madam Secretary, you know, I watched the Senate hearings about a week ago. I'm confused about [0:16] your testimony before the Senate Health Committee. You told Senator Chris Murphy that you were hiring [0:22] more staff at the Office of Civil Rights. Is that correct? Yes. [0:26] When Senator Murphy asked you about the firing of half of OCR staff last March, [0:34] you said that, you know, you might not have done that in hindsight. [0:37] I'm sorry, what? You might not have done that in hindsight, the firings, that is. [0:44] Yes, when we came on board, and those RIF notices, you know, were going out. [0:52] They were going out, not by your order, but by DOJ? [0:57] They had started that process before I came on board. [0:59] So, DOJ, and you didn't really, at that moment, oppose what they were doing. You didn't say, [1:04] stop it, because I know that OCR is important. [1:07] OCR is important, and now we've... [1:09] Yeah, but you didn't know that at that moment. They were firing half the staff that you needed [1:13] at OCR, and it took you 10 months to figure out that that was a mistake. [1:21] We have totally revamped our OCR now. [1:23] Madam Secretary, you gave me a little smile. I think that little smile indicated you thought it was a mistake. [1:27] Madam Secretary, your department resolved only 112 of the nearly 12,000 pending civil rights complaints in 2025. [1:36] 112, I'm talking about resolution agreements, not dismissals of cases. [1:42] Those, you could say those are resolutions, but we're talking about resolution agreements that were reached. [1:47] Only 112 out of the 12,000 pending civil rights complaints. That's one percent. [1:53] The lowest level of case resolutions in a decade. [1:57] In 2017, under the first Trump administration, there were 1,299 resolution agreements. [2:06] And so, I think you realize, after 10 months, that the labor-intensive nature of getting to [2:13] what I'm talking about, the legally binding contracts, which is what a resolution agreement is [2:21] between OCR and the schools that are involved in discrimination cases that guarantees relief. [2:28] You arrive at a contract that's labor-intensive. [2:31] Over half of your staff was fired by that DOES decision, but you didn't stand up to that DOES decision, [2:37] did you? You came into office unprepared and didn't know the importance of OCR, did you? [2:43] Oh, no, I know the importance of OCR. [2:45] Okay, then why did it take you 10 months? [2:47] Madam Secretary, you knew the importance. Why did it take you 10 months to figure out [2:52] and say, hey, I need these people back? In the first Trump administration, 1,200 cases were resolved. [3:02] And in your first year, only 112. That's a lot of kids out there unprotected by the Secretary of Education. [3:10] As a matter of fact, it cost taxpayers $38 million to pay for these OCR employees [3:16] that you put on administrative leave for 10 months, or you failed to say, bring them back. [3:22] You didn't rescind this decision until 10 months later. You know, you told senators that you were [3:31] bringing back staff. So you are bringing back staff, right? [3:36] Yes, we are rehiring attorneys, and we have already addressed now 4,000 of cases at OCR, because during the [3:45] Trump administration- Madam Secretary, those resolved 4,000 cases are not resolution agreements, [3:48] are they? Part of them are. Only 112 this past year. Well, in the last- It's a lot different than 4,000. [3:56] You're trying to confuse the matter. 4,000, you're talking maybe dismissals, case dismissals. [4:01] Well, in total, we have addressed 4,000 cases. Okay, let's get back to it's 112. Madam Secretary- [4:06] I'll tell you one of the reasons- Madam Secretary, here's my thing. The president budget, you know, [4:12] the whole thing with Chris Murphy is, are you disagreeing with the president? You're here to [4:18] testify in the budget. Are you disagreeing with the president's budget, which cuts OCR even more? [4:21] The budget that we submitted is a floor- It cuts OCR even more, doesn't it? [4:28] It is a floor for hiring. We want to increase those numbers, but we- The president's budget cuts OCR [4:34] even more, doesn't it? It is a reduced amount for it because it is a floor of hiring. [4:39] Madam Secretary, I'll ask you the question again. Does the president's budget [4:43] raise the budget for OCR, keep it even, or does it lower the budget for OCR staff? [4:48] I'll repeat what I said. Madam Secretary, you had a week since the Senate [4:52] Health Committee hearing to figure this out from your question with Senator Murphy. [4:57] You couldn't answer his question. I'm asking you a similar question. [5:01] Is the president's budget, you're submitting, is it, have they lowered the FTEs for OCR staff? [5:10] I've just answered that, but you must- No, you did not. You're not, you're not answering [5:14] your question. Is it lowered? It's, look, I have the budget right here. The budget says [5:20] they're cutting the FTEs. Are you disagreeing with this? The gentleman's time has expired. [5:26] Are you going to allow me to answer? The minute I try to answer, you cut me off. [5:30] It's a simple question, Madam Secretary. See, you're doing it again. [5:32] Well, the gentleman's time has expired.