Education Secretary Linda McMahon testifies on budget in House hearing

[0:04] the committee will please come to order a quorum is present the committee meets today pursuant to [0:55] notice without objection the chair may recess the committee at any point good morning secretary [1:02] mcmahon welcome welcome back to the committee under your leadership the trump administration [1:08] is delivering on reforms that will make education less expensive improve outcomes for students [1:15] and families protect civil rights and empower states and local communities with greater freedom [1:21] to make the education decisions that are right for them first i applaud the department of education [1:27] for its swift implementation of the reforms enacted under the working families tax cuts that law [1:34] contains the most significant reforms to higher education in more than a decade the working [1:40] families tax cuts will lower college costs and debt burdens for students and families whole schools [1:46] accountable so they deliver programs that set students up for future success and provide [1:53] students and workers with new pathways to successful careers in the months since enactment the department [1:59] has pursued an aggressive and consensus driven implementation process through two separate [2:06] negotiated rulemaking processes the department successfully reached consensus on regulations addressing [2:13] the law's student loan reforms accountability system and pell grant expansion for short-term workforce [2:21] programs madam secretary that's impressive work whether we agree totally or not that's impressive work at [2:29] the same time the department has been tackling broader challenges within our post-secondary education system [2:36] first madam secretary you fix the fafsa amazingly the biden harris administration famously botched the rollout of the [2:45] updated fafsa but under your leadership the department launched the 2026 2027 fafsa earlier than ever before as a result fafsa completions increased significantly [2:57] giving more students an opportunity to pursue their secondary post-secondary dreams in addition student loan repayment is finally back on track the previous administration spent its time pursuing illegal efforts to shift student loan debt on taxpayers while this department is helping [3:17] borrowers regain their financial footing and return to repayment responsibility the department is also taking the threat of unreported foreign funding seriously by opening new section 117 investigations into non-compliant institutions and revamping the reporting portal to increase transparency and public accessibility [3:40] and public accessibility finally the department is addressing student aid fraud [3:48] in recent years ghost student fraud has cost taxpayers millions of dollars and crowded legitimate students out of classrooms [3:55] criminals are increasingly using ai to expand the scale and sophistication of these schemes exploiting vulnerabilities that were worsened when key safeguards were weakened [4:08] since taking office however secretary mcmahon has implemented aggressive anti-fraud measures including restoring critical safeguards strengthening identity verification requirements and improving the department's ability to detect fraudulent activity [4:24] those efforts helped blocked over 1 billion dollars in attempted fraud in 2025 alone again madam secretary impressive work at the k-12 level the working families tax cuts delivered again that law included a massive expansion of school choice by allowing taxpayers to subtract up to seventeen hundred dollars from their tax bill for donations made to nonprofit [4:58] scholarship granting organizations or scholarship granting organizations or sgo's those organizations which must be approved by governors will distribute scholarships to families to help cover tuition [5:08] tuition tutoring special education services or other education related expenses the program will become operational in january twenty twenty seven and the joint committee on taxation estimates that by twenty thirty four the program will make approximately four point four [5:25] four point four billion dollars available to students and families annually as of last week thirty one states had indicated that they would participate [5:34] unfortunately most democrat-led states including my own have chosen politics over families thus far but i was encouraged to hear that governor hochel is is to opt new york into the program that's great news and i hope many other democrats will follow [5:44] secretary mcmahon while the treasury department is responsible for implication thank you for working closely with treasury to ensure this program fulfills its promise of expanding educational freedom for american families [6:02] The Treasury Department is responsible for implementation. [6:06] Thank you for working closely with Treasury to ensure this program fulfills its promise [6:11] of expanding educational freedom for American families. [6:17] Secretary McMahon, thank you as well for standing up for parents. [6:21] Whether it's restoring the promise of Title IX for women and girls or stopping efforts [6:26] by states and school districts to conceal health and well-being information from parents [6:31] in violation of FERPA. [6:33] The Department is once again putting parents back in the driver's seat of their children's [6:38] education, where it ought to be. [6:41] Secretary McMahon, you are also continuing to fight against anti-Semitism. [6:46] Thank you. [6:47] This committee has been beating the drum on this issue and will continue to do so. [6:53] Our friends on the other side of the aisle seem interested in this issue only when they [6:57] believe there is a political benefit to be gained. [7:01] That's tragic. [7:02] We've gone after both sides on this issue. [7:05] Thank you for standing up for Jewish students and educators and for holding institutions [7:10] accountable when they fail to protect students' safety and access to educational opportunity. [7:16] Finally, Madam Secretary, I applaud your ongoing efforts to return education decision-making [7:22] to states and local communities where it belongs. [7:25] You've already demonstrated that education programs are more effective when administered [7:30] alongside related workforce, economic, and community priorities. [7:35] The committee looks forward to working with you to advance our shared goal of empowering families, [7:41] states, and communities to deliver better outcomes for students, families, workers, and taxpayers. [7:48] Secretary McMahon, I thank you again for being here, and I look forward to your testimony. [7:55] I'll now yield to a ranking member, the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott, for his opening statement. [8:01] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Secretary McMahon, for your testimony today to discuss the [8:08] Department's priorities and the effect this budget will have on students, teachers, and families. [8:13] When you last testified before the committee in June 2025, I remarked that the Department's mission, [8:19] the mission statement was to, quote, strengthen the federal commitment to assuring access to equal educational opportunity [8:27] for every individual. [8:29] Today, as you appear before the committee, I note that the Department's mission has changed, [8:34] and it's now, quote, fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access for all students, [8:41] for students of all ages. [8:45] You'll note that there's a slight difference in those two statements, and that difference is the omission of the word federal. [8:54] Madam Secretary, the Department was created, when the Department was created, it was because of the desire [9:00] that the federal government weigh in to enforce and defend students' civil rights, to provide evidence-based resources [9:07] to low-income and rural districts, and to administer federal student aid. [9:12] We know from history that without a federal role in education, we are at a greater risk of racial segregation [9:20] in public schools, a risk that states will refuse to educate students with disabilities, and a risk that low-income [9:28] in rural communities will suffer drastic educational inequities because we generally fund public education [9:36] with the real estate tax. [9:38] And now, it is not a surprise that the word federal has been eliminated from the Department's mission. [9:44] After all, the President made it very clear that you were selected for this position and charged with dismantling the Department. [9:52] President Trump has repeatedly and incorrectly stated that he wants to return education to the states. [9:59] The fact is that education is largely already determined by state and local governments, and always has been. [10:07] States and local agencies, not the federal government, dictate curriculum, determine class sizes, [10:13] and are responsible for qualifications for teachers and requirements for high school graduation, among other decisions. [10:21] The federal role has always been to guarantee equitable access to education as directed by the Brown v. [10:27] Board of Education decision, which said that education is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. [10:37] So let me be clear, the Trump administration has not returned education to the states. [10:41] Rather, it has empowered you to effectively dismantle one of the country's strongest civil rights institutions. [10:48] As Secretary of Education, you've gone outside the bounds of the law and bypassed Congress to dismantle the Department. [10:55] President Trump admitted as much on April 2nd at a White House Easter lunch. [11:00] And you can see his comments over my shoulder when he said, in reference to closing the Department, [11:06] You know what? [11:07] You need congressional approval. [11:09] I said, don't worry about it, just do it. [11:14] And she did it. [11:15] And so under your leadership, the Department has lost half of its workforce through either forced retirements or firings. [11:21] It has entered into 10 illegal interagency agreements, transferring over 100 programs from the Department of Education to other federal agencies. [11:31] The Department staff has signaled your intention to transfer oversight and support for students with disabilities to another agency. [11:38] And last month, you announced plans to turn the Lyndon B. Johnson Education Building over to the Department of Energy. [11:44] These actions have been taken without congressional approval. [11:49] And worse, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have decided to abdicate their constitutional responsibility [11:55] to conduct real oversight into those actions. [11:58] So I must note that these are not small bureaucratic decisions. [12:03] These are seismic changes that have already had disastrous consequences for students and families. [12:09] To say nothing of the chaos, inefficiencies and millions of taxpayer dollars that have been wasted. [12:15] For example, in February 2026, the Government Accountability Office reported that the Department paid Office of Civil Rights investigators up to $38 million not to work. [12:29] And according to a report in the Senate Health Committee released last month in 2025, [12:35] The Office of Civil Rights reached zero resolution agreements involving sexual harassment, sexual violence, seclusion and restraint violations of students with learning or behavioral issues, racial harassment or discriminatory school discipline. [12:51] To add a finer point, OCR reached zero resolutions in 2025 despite having more than 2,700 pending cases. [13:01] Additionally, we've heard from numerous stakeholders about the problems that have been experienced following your transfer of adult education programs to the Department of Labor. [13:11] The Department of Labor lacks expertise to administer these programs. [13:15] Adult education programs in the Department of Education offer students lifelong skills such as literacy and support in completing a GED. [13:26] At Labor, the focus on adult education has shifted to just finding the next job, [13:31] which does not meet the needs of the students in these programs, especially in a world where the demand for upskilling requires both soft and hard skills. [13:40] Lastly, in March 2026, the GAO reported that the Office of Federal Student Aid, which is responsible for the $1.7 trillion student loan portfolio, [13:51] has stopped key oversight of student loan services. [13:55] As a result, 43 million borrowers have been left without sufficient support. [14:01] And without proper oversight, these borrowers may receive inaccurate information or be placed in the wrong repayment plans. [14:08] At the same time, you announce the plan to transfer some of FSA's functions to the Treasury Department, [14:15] which, again, lacks the expertise to adequately assist borrowers who may be eligible for discharges of their loans through the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program [14:24] or other discharge programs or even lower payment plans. [14:30] This is especially troubling because in the coming weeks, 7 million borrowers will be moved into a new, less affordable repayment plan. [14:38] Borrowers are now closer than ever to defaulting on their loans and urgently need accurate information. [14:45] The department has indicated that it intends to hire hundreds of staff at the Office of Civil Rights and FSA in attempt to course correct. [14:56] This is a predictable outcome to firing nearly half the department staff and would have been avoided had you followed the law. [15:03] Unfortunately, students who need information on their loans don't have time for this chaos, [15:08] and families whose children have been denied access to quality education don't have the luxury of, as you say, hindsight. [15:16] Taken together, these actions point to a chilling conclusion. [15:19] The administration is not simply proposing moving a few people to a different building in Washington, D.C. [15:26] These actions represent the administration's abdication of the federal government's responsibility to ensure that all students, [15:35] regardless of their race, religion, disability, income, or zip code, have access to a quality public education. [15:42] We need to know whether the staffing cuts, interagency agreements, and enforcement changes comply with the department's legal obligations. [15:51] We need to understand your plan for enforcing civil rights in education. [15:55] We must also gain insight into how student borrowers will be protected among reduced oversight. [16:03] And we'd also like to see how much this new voucher program is going to cost and what oversight there will be on that program. [16:11] With that, I look forward to your testimony and yield back the balance of my time. [16:15] I thank the gentleman. [16:18] Pursuant to Committee Rule 8C, all members who wish to insert written statements into the record may do so by submitting them to the committee clerk electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m., 14 days after this hearing. [16:33] And without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other extraneous material noted during the hearing to be submitted for the official hearing record. [16:46] I'll now turn to the introduction of today's witness, the Honorable Linda McMahon, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. [16:55] Madam Secretary, we thank you for being here today, your second run through this event. [17:00] We appreciate that. [17:01] As you are aware, it's your responsibility to provide accurate information to the committee pursuant to committee rules. [17:07] I would ask that you limit your oral presentation to a five-minute summary of your written statement. [17:13] And with that, Madam Secretary, you're recognized for your testimony. [17:16] Thank you. [17:21] Good morning, Chairman Walberg, Ranking Member Scott, and distinguished members of this committee. [17:26] Thank you for having me today. [17:28] Americans reelected President Trump with a clear mandate to sunset a 46-year-old, $3 trillion failed education bureaucracy in D.C. [17:37] and return authority to where it belongs, to parents, teachers, and local leaders. [17:42] Amid record low test scores and record high numbers of students buried in debt, Americans want results. [17:48] Today, I can confidently attest that we are delivering on the vision of educational renewal that, for decades, many promised, but none delivered. [17:57] In the past year, I've traveled to over 36 states, seeing firsthand the successes and challenges of our education systems that they face, [18:07] and has reinforced my conviction that empowering local leaders and targeting federal dollars toward evidence-based programs are the force multipliers driving our educational renaissance. [18:19] To that end, my department has carefully scrutinized every dollar of taxpayer investment to ensure that it supports clear pathways to success for our students and our families. [18:30] We've cut unproductive program funding and redirected those resources to revitalize literacy, invigorate workforce development, and support our most vulnerable students. [18:41] We have conducted an honest assessment of our operational efficacy, shrunk our bloated bureaucracy, and to date, [18:48] have secured 10 partnerships with federal agencies well-equipped to co-administered Department of Education programs. [18:55] We've stopped burdening local leaders with one-size-fits-all mandates and are now empowering them to design solutions that best support their students. [19:05] For example, we awarded Iowa the first-ever returning education to the state's waiver. [19:10] which frees millions of dollars in compliance costs. [19:14] This allows Iowa to devote more resources to proven interventions, like those that led to their double-digit reading gains. [19:21] And we continue to work closely with other states to help them realize their potential for innovation. [19:26] We are also expanding affordable, high-quality education options and restoring parents to their rightful role as the primary decision-makers in their child's education. [19:37] Thanks to President Trump and Republicans in Congress, the Education Freedom Tax Credit gives parents access to critical resources like scholarships, tutoring, and specialized services for students with disabilities, whether their child attends public or private school. [19:56] Even K-12 and higher education alike, the Trump administration is restoring safety, fairness, and equal opportunity for our students. [20:04] In this administration, we have secured seven historic deals with universities to right the wrongs of their pervasive civil rights violations. [20:13] We've returned integrity to the broken federal student aid system for the 43 million Americans holding an astounding $1.7 trillion in federal student loan debt. [20:24] Our simplified free application for federal student aid or FAFSA form launched on the earliest timeline in program history, leading to a record 11 million submissions to date. [20:36] We introduced a new earnings indicator so students no longer take on significant debt without clear, reliable information. [20:44] And thanks to our strengthened security measures, we have prevented over a billion dollars in federal student aid fraud. [20:51] We're also working hard. [20:54] We're also hard at work implementing the Working Families Tax Cuts Act, which simplifies federal student loan repayment, launches a new workforce Pell program, and will make post-secondary education more affordable. [21:08] And today, we're putting forward a request that accelerates these reforms. [21:13] This year's budget request maintains full funding for the Title I-A grants to local education agencies program, devoting over $18 billion to serve children from low-income families. [21:25] It includes $33 billion for the Pell Grant program, which supports low-income students, representing an increase of over $10 billion. [21:34] It provides $2 billion in new Make Education Great Again grants, a historic investment to improve numeracy and literacy, and remediate our decades-long academic proficiency crisis. [21:47] And for our students with disabilities and their families, the Trump administration requests $16 billion for IDEA programs, which is an increase of more than half a billion dollars. [21:59] We've been clear, shifting authority back to the states will not come at the expense of essential federal support and programs, much of which predate the department itself. [22:09] When the Trump administration makes promises, we keep them. [22:14] And with your partnership, we will unleash momentous opportunity for every child to realize their God-given potential. [22:21] Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. [22:24] Madam Secretary, thank you for your testimony. [22:29] Under Committee Rule 9, we'll now question Secretary McMahon under the five-minute rule. [22:35] I recognize myself for five minutes of questioning. [22:40] As Secretary McMahon, the working families tax cuts is a historic win for education. [22:46] The administration is well underway with implementation, and I want you to share a little about how that's going. [22:53] The law made sweeping changes, eliminating Grad Plus loans programs, capping Parent Plus loans, and creating new simplified repayment assistance plan. [23:04] Can you tell us more about how these loan limits aim to lower the cost of higher education throughout the country? [23:16] Well, thank you very much, Chairman Walberg, for that question. [23:19] It's something that I'm really very pleased that we're going to be able to put more programs into effect to bring down the cost of higher education. [23:31] That is a primary goal of ours. College costs are just exorbitant. Students are burdened with debt. [23:39] We have $1.7 trillion in debt, 43 million students. Only about 25% of them are, you know, are repaying their loans. [23:48] So we really have to do something to bring down the cost of college. [23:52] And you mentioned getting rid of the Grad Plus loans. Up until that time, a student could go to a university, [23:58] and whatever that university said was the cost of the graduate program, that's how much you could borrow. [24:03] It was just that simple. So what we have done is remove Grad Plus from that, [24:08] and now we've put in caps on other programs for graduate students and undergraduate students [24:15] to make sure that we can help reduce the cost and the burden of college. [24:20] And at the same time, making repayment programs a lot more simple. [24:26] You know, we're going to have eventually only two tracks for repaying outstanding loans. [24:32] One sets a standard repayment. The other is RAP, which is based more on income. [24:37] But until that time, those programs that are available at the moment for students to enter into repayments, [24:44] they can still go into those payments up until 2028. [24:48] We hope to encourage them to go already into RAP or a standard program, because then it becomes more simple for them, [24:55] and they don't have to change horses in the middle of the ride, if you will. [25:00] So I think all of these programs that we're putting into place are simplifying it, [25:04] and students will have an opportunity to have a better understanding of what their responsibility is, [25:10] and hopefully it's just a more direct way for payments. [25:16] Thank you. I applaud yours and the President's efforts in returning education to the states, literally. [25:25] You've made great progress showing Congress how that can work. [25:29] In particular, through the Workforce Development Partnership between your agency and the Department of Labor, [25:35] over $1 billion in funding has been successfully drawn down by states under programs included in that partnership. [25:42] What reforms, Madam Secretary, does this partnership make possible, [25:46] and how is this partnership providing a model for the other partnerships you're developing? [25:52] Well, thanks very much. This was our first interagency agreement that we signed with the Department of Labor, [26:00] under the authority of the Economy Act. [26:03] And the goal here is to co-administer these programs to other agencies. [26:09] The interagency agreement are programs that have been utilized through agencies for many, many years in Congress, [26:16] kind of subcontracting for those services. [26:20] We're co-administering them with the Department of Labor. [26:23] One of the biggest, I think, results that we've had in this program is this combination of WIOA, [26:31] which had been handled by the Department of Education, [26:34] and Perkins Grants, which had been at Labor. [26:36] And now we've made possible that borrowers can or students can come into this program on a combined application for WIOA and Perkins, [26:49] and we've had now about 21 states submit those combined plans. [26:55] That's a really big, efficient use so far of what we've seen, [27:01] and working with the Department of Labor. [27:04] Thank you. [27:05] In less than 35 seconds, let me ask you this question. [27:08] Can you tell us somewhat about the OCR caseload you inherited and how your enforcement priorities will better serve students? [27:16] Well, we are really moving forward at this particular junction to address our caseload. [27:22] We inherited from the Biden administration about 19,000 backlog, [27:28] and when we had left after the first administration with President Trump, there was about 4,500, [27:34] so that grew to 19,000 when we came over and took over. [27:39] We brought in Assistant Secretary Kim Rishi, who was responsible during the first Trump term of bringing down that caseload and being the head of OCR, [27:51] and she is now with us as the Assistant Secretary. [27:54] She's been in a few months. [27:56] It took a while for her to get confirmed, but I'm really delighted to have her. [27:59] She is bringing back lawyers. [28:02] She's addressing this, and over the past, just this past quarter, we have settled over 4,000 cases. [28:10] So we're on the right track. [28:11] Well, we wish you good success on that. [28:13] My time has expired, and now I recognize the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Courtney. [28:17] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [28:19] Secretary McMahon, President Trump said a couple of days ago that he was not thinking about Americans' financial situations, [28:27] not even, quote, a little bit. [28:29] You and your department demonstrated the same mindset when you finalized H.R.1's new student loan caps [28:38] that will drive up borrowing costs for advanced degree nursing students, nurse anesthetists, midwives, and nurse practitioners. [28:45] That goes into effect July 1st. [28:47] As you know, the rule excluded nursing from the department's professional degree definition, [28:52] which aside from being one of the most insulting tone-deaf messages to 5 million nurses imaginable across the country, [28:59] it will, in fact, raise education costs for critically needed nurses. [29:04] 250,000 nurses who understand their financial situation very well signed a petition to you organized by the American Nurses Association, [29:14] America's largest professional nurses organization, vehemently protesting this rule during the comment period, [29:20] which, of course, the department unfortunately brushed aside. [29:23] As the president of ANA stated, DOE's reasoning distorts how nursing education, licensure, and practice work, [29:30] and in doing so sends an alarming message to nurses and to the public. [29:34] And again, they understand that with a cap, and where nursing programs exceed, their tuition exceeds those caps, [29:41] they are going to be pushed into the private lending market. [29:43] That's why private lenders supported H.R.1, because they saw it as an opportunity for increasing their book of business. [29:51] So my first question to you is to confirm that this rule, defining professions and capping federal loan availability, [29:58] is actually implementing H.R.1, the One Big Beautiful Bill. Is that correct? [30:02] Yes, and, you know, we did that. [30:04] Thank you. So my next question. [30:05] We did that with careful consideration. [30:07] My next question, Madam Speaker, is, again, you served on the Board of Trustees at Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Connecticut, [30:15] a fine institution with a great advanced nursing program. For an advanced nurse program, the tuition at that school is actually $80,000 for a three-year program. [30:32] So again, just the tuition for that program exceeds the caps that you put into place with this H.R.1 rule. [30:40] So for those students, they are really going to have no opportunity unless they come from families of great wealth, [30:47] except to go out and try and find loans in the private market where interest rates are higher and the underwriting process [30:55] is going to disqualify some people. [30:57] We have a nursing shortage in this country, and as ANA pointed out, this rule is actually going to undermine and damage [31:09] the ability of this country to actually educate and bring online nurses that, again, in the numbers of hundreds of thousands, [31:17] are open and needed at this critical time. [31:20] So based on your experience, which again is right local for you, where the tuition of the university that you sat on the Board of Trustees [31:28] exceeds the lending caps that you put into place, what do you say to those nurses who asked for your consideration [31:35] during the comment period that you brushed aside? [31:38] Well, first of all, and thank you for bringing that up so we can address it. [31:43] I do think that nurses are incredibly respected professors. [31:47] Well, your rule certainly doesn't show that. [31:50] Well, let me just address this issue. [31:53] You know, we looked very, very carefully at the entire nursing profession. [31:58] Ninety-five percent of the nurses that are in programs do not exceed these caps. [32:04] Seventy-eight percent of the nurses that are moving for graduate programs do not exceed or come up to these caps. [32:13] We were very carefully looking at the cost of these programs across the country. [32:18] There are outliers. [32:19] There are programs which they cost more. [32:21] But you can get your degrees in many universities around the country that don't come close to charging these amounts. [32:29] And our goal, I have to disagree with your framing of this whole situation, [32:35] because our goal is to bring down the cost of higher education. [32:38] And since we put in these caps, just this week, the University of California in Irvine… [32:44] That's great. [32:45] But this week also inflation went up 3.8 percent across the country. [32:50] Your own data in terms of analyzing this rulemaking process actually showed that for nurse anesthetists, [32:57] at least 28 percent of them who are in education right now have costs that exceed the caps. [33:04] Nurse practitioners 23 percent. [33:06] And family practice nurses by 22.6 percent. [33:09] This is from your own department. [33:11] So you didn't even listen to your own people and staff in terms of what cohort of nurses are going to be excluded because of these caps [33:21] and who are going to have higher borrowing costs if they want to complete their degrees. [33:26] Or… [33:27] Yield back, Mr. Chair. [33:28] Or… [33:29] The gentleman's time has expired, and we hope those answers can be given later on. [33:34] Now I recognize the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Wilson. [33:39] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [33:40] And, Madam Secretary, thank you so much for your success. [33:44] Indeed, the American people are just so grateful for your efforts to close down the Department of Education. [33:51] This should be a local issue for local elected school boards. [33:56] The opposition often say you're cutting out essential programs, but that's not true. [34:02] What you're actually doing is cutting red tape and bureaucracy so that educators can spend more time educating students. [34:09] Could you please review with us how the dismantling the Department of Education will empower state and local leaders to better serve students? [34:18] And, indeed, my view, schools should be run by local elected school boards, not Washington bureaucrats. [34:25] And, additionally, I was grateful to praise your deserved success of deregulation Monday in the congressional record, which I provided a copy. [34:34] So, indeed, we really appreciate your success. [34:37] So, how do we address the accusations of actually eliminating programs? [34:43] Well, thank you very much, Congressman. [34:48] You know, I have been touring now. [34:52] I've been to about 36 states, and I really wanted to get close to the situation and look at schools. [34:59] So, I've visited all kinds. [35:01] I've visited, you know, elementary, middle schools, micro schools. [35:06] I've talked to principals and teachers and parents. [35:11] And all of them are incredibly happy that the president is really looking at moving education power back to parents, [35:20] because parents and teachers that are closest to the child understand what the educational needs are, you know, for their children. [35:28] So, I am really pleased at the programs that we've been able to put into place already. [35:34] You know, in K-12 education, one of the things that we're looking at so much is, why can't our children read? [35:41] Why can't they do math? [35:42] So, let's make sure that we are looking at states that have been successful in their programs, returning reading to the science of reading. [35:51] The miracle of Mississippi is a great example. [35:54] Louisiana has adopted this program. [35:57] Florida, Iowa, Texas, others, and they're showing the results of this. [36:02] And now we want to make sure that the funds that are going into these states through our, through this budget program of our mega grant program, [36:12] we are reserving 50% of the monies that are going to states. [36:16] We're asking states to reserve 50% of that money, 25% devoted to literacy, 25% devoted to numeracy, so that we can get our children to read. [36:26] The most important thing we can do for our children is to make sure they can read and do math. [36:33] We have failed them. [36:35] When you have only 30%, or even a little less, of 8th graders and 4th graders that can read at proficient level, [36:42] we are failing our students, and we need to change that. [36:45] So, our states are really on board to be able to have more money block granted to them so that governors and superintendents [36:55] can spend that money where, in their states, they need to spend it most. [37:00] The most innovation that we have had in programs across the country so far in these successes, I noted, [37:07] were innovations at the state level. [37:09] They're not being directed from the bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., [37:13] so let's make sure we are supporting those efforts by giving the money to the states [37:19] and letting them be able to spend the money where they know it needs to be spent. [37:23] Well, in South Carolina, we really appreciate your visit. [37:26] In fact, you were with a champion of education, our superintendent of education, Ellen Weaver, [37:31] and I'm also grateful that you were there with Congresswoman Sherry Biggs, [37:35] and so what a team you all made promoting quality education. [37:40] With that in mind, too, there's been growth in school choice over the past year with a couple of years, [37:46] with 1.5 million students now enrolled in school choice programs. [37:50] I know the benefit of that. [37:52] My wife was a teacher at an alternative school, giving young — challenged young people another chance. [37:58] What do you see as the future for school choice? [38:01] Well, so many states now — and this is a state issue — they have adopted school choice programs in their states, [38:08] but under the Working Families Tax Cut Bill, one of the things that the president did provide was the first time of a national school choice program, [38:17] which actually is private money coming into the school — coming into states, [38:22] and governors can approve what are known as scholarship-granting organizations. [38:28] Private money gets donated into those organizations, and the donor can deduct up to $1,700 on their federal tax form. [38:39] Parents can then go to these SGOs and apply for scholarships, or they can apply for after-school tutoring, [38:46] or if they have a child with disabilities for extra services. [38:51] So this is a really big part of the Working Families Tax Cuts Bill. [38:56] Well, we so appreciate your success on behalf of the families and educators of our country. [39:02] I yield back. [39:03] Thank you. [39:04] The gentleman's time has expired, and I recognize the gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici. [39:08] Thank you, Secretary McMahon. [39:09] You started your testimony today by talking about a clear mandate, but the majority of people in this country do not support dismantling the Department of Education, [39:18] and frankly, many are pretty worried about what's happening. [39:22] And since you've been secretary, the department has entered into 10 so-called interagency agreements — [39:27] I call them bureaucracy expansion agreements — that claim to transfer the administration of critical education programs, [39:35] programs that Congress gave to the Department of Education to other federal agencies. [39:39] And I've previously asked you what authority you rely on for these agreements, and you have cited the Economy Act of 1933. [39:47] So, Secretary McMahon, is it still your position that the Economy Act of 1933 gives you the authority to enter into these agreements? [39:55] And that's just a yes or no question, please. [39:57] Yes. [39:58] While the Economy Act allows an agency to perform services for another agency, [40:02] the Department of Justice and the Comptroller General have established that the Economy Act does not authorize the transfer of statutory functions. [40:10] They've been vested in a particular agency by Congress, and you've claimed that other agencies are co-administering or co-managing these programs. [40:19] But the fact is that several, if not all, of these bureaucracy expansion agreements are illegal or unconstitutional. [40:26] And if your legal counsel is telling you that the Economy Act authorizes you to do these transfers without Congress, [40:32] you should hire better lawyers. [40:34] Madam Secretary, it's my understanding that the next bureaucracy expansion agreement will likely transfer the administration of programs [40:41] in the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, including services under IDEA. [40:47] When we last spoke, you were determining which of these programs should be, where these programs should be transferred, [40:53] to the Department of Labor or to the Department of Health and Human Services. [40:58] So, Secretary McMahon, does the Department of Education plan to transfer the administration of IDEA to another agency, [41:05] yes or no, and if yes, to which agency? [41:08] We have not yet made a determination of where IDEA services would go. [41:14] Do you plan to transfer the services to another agency, yes or no? [41:18] Well, eventually, Congresswoman, you do know that... [41:21] Just yes or no, I have other questions. [41:23] No, it's not a yes or no answer. [41:24] I'm sorry. [41:25] We will be looking to transfer and first co-administering these programs with other agencies. [41:29] Okay, that was your answer. [41:30] Under our proof of concern. [41:31] Madam Secretary, I want you to know I heard from a foster mom of a three-year-old girl with disabilities. [41:36] She's pretty outraged that you've fired employees in the Office of Special Education, [41:41] and she said we love our special-need kids. [41:44] They teach us more about life than we could ever teach them, [41:46] so please fight for families with these kids and assure us that our country cares. [41:50] So, I implore you to show this mom and parents across the country that you do care by keeping IDEA at one agency, the Department of Education. [41:59] So, also, Madam Secretary, I want to follow up on Representative Courtney's questions. [42:03] You got more than 80,000 public comments and bipartisan pushback, but you still have decided to restrict the definition of what counts as a professional degree. [42:14] And Representative Courtney covered nurses, but there's also social workers, teachers, physical and occupational therapists, and work in a lot of other areas. [42:23] They might need to give up on their dreams. [42:26] You suggested they can just move to a different place and go to a cheaper place, but I'll tell you. [42:31] A student at Pacific University who's studying to get her licensure in special education said, [42:35] the affordability crisis that aspiring educators face bars many from entering the profession. [42:41] So, you're the Secretary of the Department of Education, and you're claiming that teaching is not a professional degree. [42:47] Do you consider educators and teachers unprofessional? Yes or no? [42:53] Of course not. [42:54] Good. [42:55] Well, should aspiring teachers be able to access affordable loans? [42:58] I think teachers and all of those who are getting degrees should be able to get an affordable loan, and that is why we want to bring down the cost of education. [43:08] Well, Madam Secretary. [43:09] Well, let me, if I may, because this is important. [43:12] You've answered my question, though. [43:13] No, no, I haven't been allowed to answer the question. [43:16] We already have seen two universities that have reduced their graduate programs because they said, [43:21] responding to these caps, they had to reduce their fees because they want to provide these programs. [43:27] I'm going to reclaim my time and note that this administration is spending between one and two billion dollars on a worm, [43:32] a billion dollars on tax cuts that could go to helping students. [43:35] Madam Secretary, do you know what Michael Eisner, the CEO of Disney, and Andrea Jung, the former CEO of Avon Products, [43:42] and Indra Nooji, the former CEO of PepsiCo, and Sarah Blakely, the founder of Spanx. [43:47] Do you know what they all have in common? [43:48] I guess not. [43:51] Well, they're successful business people. [43:52] They're successful business people. [43:53] You know what they studied in college? [43:55] Theater. [43:56] They were theater majors. [43:57] But you recently said a degree should set up graduates for success and not trap them in lifelong debt. [44:02] And three of the programs you used as examples of what not to study are theater and film. [44:07] So through studying theater, these successful business people learned confidence, communication, creativity, collaboration, [44:16] all skills that are helping them and are beneficial in any career. [44:19] So I implore you to understand that education is not just job training. [44:24] And when you are suggesting to people that they should not study certain fields, [44:28] that is definitely the federal government trying to manage people's decisions about their future. [44:34] And Mr. Chairman, as I yield back, I would like to submit for the record an article titled [44:38] Nine Ways a Theater Degree Trumps a Business Degree, and I yield back. [44:42] Without objection, it will be submitted. [44:46] I now recognize the gentle lady, the chairman emeritus of this committee, Mrs. Fox. [44:53] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very much, Secretary, for being here with us today. [45:00] I'm very pleased President Trump appointed you to be secretary and to give you the tough task of dismantling the Department of Education [45:07] and turn the responsibility for education back to local and state level. [45:12] As you know, Secretary, I fought for greater accountability in federal programs my entire career. [45:19] I was especially angered by the Biden-Harris administration's unwillingness to ensure that taxpayer dollars were spent wisely. [45:26] Democrats gave away tens of billions of dollars during COVID with no accountability. [45:31] They prioritized DEI nonsense while student achievement cratered. [45:36] Can you please discuss the department's work to ensure greater accountability in the use of taxpayers' hard-earned dollars? [45:44] Well, I think, you know, one of the first things, Congresswoman, it's a pleasure to see you this morning. [45:53] One of the first things that we wanted to make sure that we did, and one of the things I am most proud of that we have been able to accomplish since I took office, [46:03] was the total revamp of the FAFSA form and putting that program into place. [46:09] It was a mess when we left. It wasn't even launched on time under the Biden administration. [46:13] Congress actually did order us to make sure it was launched, and we absolutely revamped it. It launched early. [46:20] It takes now about 35 minutes to complete the FAFSA form as opposed to two or three days. [46:26] And we have also now put in a special program in there so that a student or a parent who is applying for these loans can see how much a program is going to cost [46:44] and what the income is for those programs when you graduate so you can take a look at it and think about whether or not this is going to be something that you want to take on this kind of debt for. [46:56] Do you want to look at another college or university? How is it? And this is something that has not been available to parents before. [47:04] And so I think this is an incredible improvement in the FAFSA system. It not only launched on time, it launched early. [47:12] And I was pleased to be at some of the beta tests for it to listen to parents about how easy it was to navigate. [47:19] Thank you. I was going to ask about your efforts in the FSA and getting it back on a firm footing. [47:27] But I think the chairman has lauded your efforts there and covered that issue. [47:33] Madam Secretary, again, I'm grateful to you for working with members of Congress during your tenure. [47:40] I'd like for that to continue. And I'd like to simply explore a commitment to continue working constructively on this proposed rule for undergraduate certificates as it relates to gainful employment. [47:54] You and I have spoken about this and I've spoken with your staff. As you know, people joke that accountability is my middle name. [48:02] I'm glad accountability for higher education was enshrined in our reforms in H.R. 1 after having pursued it for eight years as a leader on this committee. [48:15] Now that accountability is here, I believe that this accountability needs to be equitable and proportional. [48:23] In particular, regulations surrounding cosmetology schools and other similar undergraduate certificate programs needs to be contextualized and properly targeted and fair. [48:36] Many of the graduates of these programs work part time, are paid in uncertain tipping structures, and live in low cost of living rural areas. [48:46] May I please have your commitment to continue to work constructively with many of us to ensure these regulations deliver on fair accountability without unduly harming these people who want to enter these careers? [49:03] Yes, and you know we are in the rulemaking process now for these particular loans. [49:11] And so, and I think our staffs have already been working together and will continue to do that. [49:16] And I think you're going to get a lot of other comments from other people. [49:21] People who have gone through these programs, who've had successes, and who understand how difficult it is sometimes to get their careers up and running. [49:33] And they want to do the right thing by the American taxpayer. [49:39] But we need to make these accountability measures fair. [49:42] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [49:44] I yield back. [49:45] I thank the gentlelady. [49:46] And I recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Tucano. [49:49] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [49:51] Good to see you again, Madam Secretary. [49:53] Madam Secretary, you know, I watched the Senate hearings about a week ago. [50:00] I'm confused about your testimony before the Senate Help Committee. [50:04] You told Senator Chris Murphy that you were hiring more staff at the Office of Civil Rights. [50:09] Is that correct? [50:10] Yes. [50:11] And when Senator Murphy asked you about the firing of half of OCR staff last March, [50:18] you said that, you know, you might have not have done that in hindsight. [50:22] I'm sorry, what? [50:23] You might not have done that in hindsight, the firings, that is. [50:28] Yes, when we came on board and those RIF notices, you know, were going out. [50:36] That was it. [50:37] They were going out pursuant, not by your order, but by DOJ? [50:40] They had started that process before I came on board. [50:44] So DOJ, DOJ, and you didn't really, at that moment, oppose what they were doing. [50:48] You didn't say, stop it, because I know that OCR is important. [50:51] OCR is important. [50:53] And now we've. [50:54] But you didn't know that at that moment. [50:55] They were firing half the staff that you needed our OCR, and it took you 10 months to figure out that that was a mistake. [51:02] We have totally revamped our OCR now. [51:07] Madam Secretary, you gave me a little smile. [51:09] I think that little smile indicated you thought it was a mistake. [51:12] Madam Secretary, your department resolved only 112 of the nearly 12,000 pending civil rights complaints in 2025. [51:21] 112, I'm talking about resolution agreements, not dismissals of cases. [51:26] You could say those are resolutions, but we're talking about resolution agreements that were reached. [51:31] Only 112 out of the 12,000 pending civil rights complaints. [51:36] That's 1%, the lowest level of case resolutions in a decade. [51:42] In 2017, under the first Trump administration, there were 1,299 resolution agreements. [51:49] And so I think you realize after 10 months that the labor-intensive nature of getting to what I'm talking about, [52:00] the legally binding contracts, which is what a resolution agreement is between OCR and the schools that are involved in discrimination cases, [52:11] guarantees relief. [52:13] You arrive at a contract that's labor-intensive. [52:16] Over half of your staff was fired by that DOES decision, but you didn't stand up to that DOES decision, did you? [52:24] You came into office unprepared and didn't know the importance of OCR, did you? [52:28] Oh, no, I know the importance of OCR. [52:31] Okay, then why did it take you 10 months? [52:33] Madam Secretary, you knew the importance. [52:35] Why did it take you 10 months to figure out and say, hey, I need these people back? [52:39] In the first Trump administration, 1,200 cases were resolved. [52:46] And in your first year, only 112. [52:49] That's a lot of kids out there unprotected by the Secretary of Education. [52:54] As a matter of fact, it cost taxpayers $38 million to pay for these OCR employees that you put on administrative leave for 10 months, [53:03] or you failed to say, bring them back. [53:07] You didn't rescind, you didn't rescind this decision until 10 months later. [53:12] You know, you told senators that you were bringing back staff. [53:18] So you are bringing back staff, right? [53:20] Yes, we are rehiring attorneys and we have, we have already addressed now 4,000 of cases at OCR. [53:28] Because during the Trump administration- [53:30] Madam Secretary, those resolved 4,000 cases are not resolution agreements, are they? [53:34] Part of them are. [53:35] Only 112 this past year. [53:38] Well, in the last- [53:39] It's a lot different than 4,000. [53:41] You're trying to confuse the matter. [53:42] 4,000, you're talking maybe dismissals, case dismissals. [53:45] Well, in total, we have addressed 4,000 cases now. [53:48] Okay, let's get back to its 112. [53:50] Well- [53:51] Madam Secretary- [53:52] I'll tell you one of the reasons we were- [53:53] Madam Secretary, I, I, here's my thing. [53:55] The President's budget, you know, the whole thing with Chris Murphy is, are you, are you [54:01] disagreeing with the President's, you're here to testify on the budget. [54:03] Are you disagreeing with the President's budget, which cuts OCR even more? [54:06] The budget that we submitted is a floor- [54:11] It cuts OCR even more, doesn't it? [54:13] It is a floor for hiring. [54:15] We want to increase those numbers, but we submitted- [54:17] The President's budget cuts OCR even more, doesn't it? [54:20] It is a reduced amount for it because it is a floor of hiring. [54:24] Madam Secretary, I'll ask you the question again. [54:26] Does the President's budget raise the budget for OCR, keep it even, or does it lower the [54:32] budget for OCR staff? [54:33] Right. [54:34] I'll repeat what I said. [54:35] Madam Secretary, you had a week since the Senate Health Committee hearing to figure this [54:40] out from when, your question with Senator Murphy. [54:42] You couldn't answer his question. [54:44] I'm answering, I'm asking you a similar question. [54:46] Is the President's budget, you're submitting, is it, have they lowered the FTEs for OCR staff? [54:55] I've just answered that, but you must- [54:56] No, you did not. [54:57] You're not answering the question. [54:58] You won't let- [54:59] Is it lowered? [55:00] Look, I have the budget right here. [55:02] The budget says they're cutting the FTEs. [55:07] Are you disagreeing with this? [55:09] The gentleman's time has expired. [55:10] Are you going to allow me to answer? [55:12] You have an answer, yeah. [55:13] The minute I try to answer, you cut me off. [55:14] It's a simple question, Madam Secretary. [55:15] See? [55:16] You're doing it again. [55:17] Well, the gentleman's time has expired. [55:19] I now recognize the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Allen. [55:23] Hello. [55:25] Madam Secretary right here. [55:27] Thank you for being with us today. [55:29] Would you like to answer the question? [55:31] Thank you. [55:32] Yes. [55:33] Our budget floor, it is not the maximum we hope, and we hope to get more lawyers, but [55:42] the budget we submitted is lower than last year's budget for our FTEs and OCRs. [55:48] But we, that is the floor that we submitted. [55:52] We hope then to work with Congress to raise that so that we will hire more lawyers. [55:56] Yeah. [55:57] And who's best to judge what the needs are in the floor, in the ceiling, in the cost? [56:04] I mean, that's your role, correct? [56:07] And we're moving expeditiously to resolve as many of these cases as we can. [56:12] And I hired the person that was so successful in the Trump administration, Kim Rishi, Assistant [56:19] Secretary, to handle this program in the first quarter that she's been there. [56:25] As a matter of fact, we were really doing well until Congress had the longest shutdown, [56:31] you know, in history. [56:33] Right. [56:34] And so we lost time with that. [56:35] Right. [56:36] Okay. [56:37] Well, in February 2026, your department updated the prayer guidance for public schools, replacing [56:44] the Biden administration's flawed guidance. [56:46] Thank you for that. [56:48] I've long been believed that faith plays, does play an essential role for, you know, not [56:56] every student, but certainly religious liberty must be protected in our schools. [57:01] Can you talk about the prayer guidance and why every student's right to religious liberty be [57:07] protected in the schools? [57:09] Well, sure. [57:10] You know, every student should have the right to pray. [57:13] A student can form a religious club under our guidance. [57:16] And a student can express their faith, you know, in a paper or in a conversation. [57:22] And that's pretty much our guidance that we're given. [57:25] But you must be respectful of others at the time that you were doing that. [57:30] Certainly there is a quiet time to pray. [57:33] And you should, the prayer cannot be given on the basis that this is a representation of [57:41] the school or the institution. [57:43] Right. [57:44] This is a private matter. [57:45] And students certainly can pray. [57:47] Right. [57:48] Secretary, one of the things in the working families tax cuts that I'm excited about is [57:56] the Workforce Pell. [57:57] I hear from my district all the time about unfilled jobs. [58:01] And I know Workforce Pell will provide students and workers economic mobility through high-quality, [58:07] shorter-term programs. [58:09] Can you talk about the innovation you've seen across the country as states and institutions [58:13] prepare for Workforce Pell's launch this July? [58:17] Well, I think one of the things that we have recognized across our country is our workforce shortage. [58:24] And I've been incredibly heartened as I have gone across the country to look at now the [58:32] relationships between community colleges and high schools and what they're doing to [58:37] have dual credentials to put people into the workforce. [58:40] One of the things that we did in the budget was fully fund Pell. [58:46] So that will allow for the faster implementation of the Workforce Pell program. [58:52] We, you know, made sure that the shortfall was covered. [58:56] We put in $10.5 billion. [58:58] That allows Pell to operate at the maximum level, a little over $7,900. [59:03] So we want to get that short-term workforce Pell in place as soon as possible because we [59:10] need this workforce. [59:12] So shorter-term certificates, you know, some 18 months, some 8 months, some 6 weeks, those [59:18] programs need to be put in place. [59:21] And so when students can, you know, you know, get that money. [59:29] Right. [59:30] And I think that money is, I was just corrected, it's $7,395 is the maximum. [59:35] Right. [59:36] Okay. [59:37] All right. [59:38] I think that workforce training is critical. [59:41] And I believe that we need cooperation from the business community. [59:48] And, you know, we need the business community talking to the education community about their [59:53] needs. [59:54] Exactly. [59:55] Whether it be Disney or anybody else, correct? [59:57] Well, absolutely. [59:58] And we've seen so much progress with that. [1:00:00] Right. [1:00:01] We've seen, you know, private like, for instance, Toyota. [1:00:04] Right. [1:00:05] In West Virginia. [1:00:06] There's a community college that they work with. [1:00:09] It's, you know, Bridge Valley. [1:00:11] They actually put machinery and equipment into that community college. [1:00:16] Those students are then trained. [1:00:18] They can go and work on the floor at Toyota or go to any other manufacturing company with [1:00:23] the skills they learned. [1:00:24] Thank you for your bottom-up approach. [1:00:26] I can't believe members of Congress sit up here and tell you what needs to be, you know, [1:00:31] this, this, and this. [1:00:33] Thank you for listening to our teachers and our students and our parents. [1:00:36] And I yield back. [1:00:37] Thank you. [1:00:38] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:00:39] The gentleman's time has expired. [1:00:40] Now I recognize the gentlelady from Georgia, Ms. McMath. [1:00:43] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [1:00:44] I'd like to enter into the record report from Protect Borrowers analyzing the different ways [1:00:49] that the big, ugly law has made college more expensive for the students. [1:00:52] It's deep-dive that OBBA law makes paying for college more expensive and risky. [1:00:57] Without objection. [1:00:58] Thank you very much. [1:00:59] Thank you. [1:01:00] Secretary, I appreciate you being here today, and thank you for the call that we had earlier [1:01:05] this week. [1:01:06] I appreciate it. [1:01:07] And thank you for allowing me to share my concerns about some of your plans for the department. [1:01:11] I would like to invite you to come to Georgia again, but this time come to my district, [1:01:16] and I would love for you to hear from some of the public school administrators in my district [1:01:20] who are also worried about some of the very concerns that I discussed with you. [1:01:24] Georgia has a budget surplus of over $14 billion, and despite that, our Republican government actively chooses not to spend any of that money on educating our children. [1:01:36] States already control education. [1:01:39] The whole idea that giving them less funding for specific education programs will solve these problems, it just doesn't hold true. [1:01:48] My state could take action, but it doesn't. [1:01:52] Federal support makes the difference where our states choose not to. [1:01:58] Last year, I asked you about the cancellation of the Charting My Path for Student Success program when you were with us before, [1:02:07] which served over 1,000 disabled students and their families across 62 high schools in 11 states. [1:02:14] It provided support and frequent small group sessions for students with autism and dyslexia and other disabilities and their families, [1:02:27] and so that they can meet their goals of graduating from high school and become successful adults. [1:02:33] As you can see, the email that was sent to families, this is the email behind me, canceling the program overnight. [1:02:42] You may remember it from last year because it says, and I'm quoting, [1:02:47] the federal funding provided by the Department of Education for this initiative has been discontinued immediately, [1:02:52] and that your child will no longer receive transition supports. [1:02:57] Now, I submitted written questions to you to learn more about what happened, [1:03:02] which I would like to submit for the record, please. [1:03:05] Without objection, Sorge. [1:03:07] Thank you. [1:03:08] I asked you to identify how many students were being served by the program, [1:03:12] and you responded, 1,076. [1:03:15] I asked how much of the $45.5 million that was set aside for the program had already been spent, [1:03:23] and you responded that the department paid out a total of $19.7 million in support of the program, [1:03:31] a program that was never, ever completed. [1:03:34] I asked if there was any warning given to the schools or the families that immediate cancellation was being considered, [1:03:41] and you responded, no. [1:03:44] The department notified the contractor that the associated contract was being terminated on February 10, 2025, [1:03:51] that same day. [1:03:52] The same day, the contractor notified school districts that work associated with the evaluation would cease. [1:03:59] I then asked you how many teachers were dismissed, or reassigned, or had their pay cut, [1:04:06] and you responded that 61 instructors weren't hired as part of the evaluation, [1:04:11] and that in most cases, instructors were reassigned for the school year, [1:04:16] and at least five teachers were dismissed. [1:04:18] One of them is my constituent, a lifelong special education teacher who uprooted her entire career, [1:04:24] changing jobs, schools, and counties just to take part in this program. [1:04:29] She did that because she believes in this work, [1:04:31] because she believes in every child's ability to live up to their full potential, [1:04:35] and has seen too many kids in our state left behind. [1:04:39] But after the decision, she was pulled out of her class, [1:04:42] told that she would no longer be teaching her kids, had her pay cut, [1:04:45] and was reassigned to a middle school, an age group that she hasn't taught in decades. [1:04:50] I also asked you about reinstating the program, along with two others that were helping disabled students, [1:04:56] and you responded that the department is currently in discussions with firms associated with two of the projects [1:05:03] listed above to evaluate potential reinstatement. [1:05:08] But neither of those projects identified were the Charting My Path program. [1:05:13] Now that the department acknowledges that almost $20 million have been spent on it, [1:05:18] can you tell my constituent in my district whether the Charting My Path program is being considered for reinstatement? [1:05:25] Well, what we are doing now is our recommendation is that we have approximately, I think, consolidated six programs under IDEA, [1:05:38] and we are looking at our mega-grant block going to states so that governors and state superintendents can look at those programs [1:05:46] and decide which are best for their state. [1:05:49] Right, so, Madam Secretary, can you tell me or not whether or not a specific program? [1:05:53] They can decide whether or not this program would be submitted and could then be reinstated in their state. [1:05:58] Okay, so then you're not really sure? You're not sure? [1:06:01] Well, the governor and the superintendent would have to do that. [1:06:03] Okay, so what I'm saying then is I'm going to follow up with you to try to get an answer, [1:06:07] because I sent these questions after your hearing in June of last year, [1:06:11] and I didn't receive responses from the majority until eight months later, February, eight months later. [1:06:17] And I just want to say there's absolutely no reason that these students should not have been able to finish the year with their teachers. [1:06:24] There was nothing stopping your department from waiting until the school year was over to take such drastic measures [1:06:30] and making these decisions for our kids. [1:06:33] So I'm, once again, Secretary, going to ask you to truly reconsider reinstating this program, [1:06:40] truly ask you to make things right for all the families that are depending on these resources and means [1:06:47] for our children with disabilities, and I yield. [1:06:51] I now recognize the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Colmer. [1:06:54] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:06:55] Madam Secretary, thank you so much for being here today. [1:06:57] I want to thank you for your work to fight fraud. [1:07:00] within the Department of Education. [1:07:02] I'm very encouraged to see your department taking a meaningful look at ways to protect against bad actors [1:07:07] who are scamming taxpayers out of billions of dollars. [1:07:11] It's very clear President Trump is taking a government-wide look at programs that are vulnerable to fraud, [1:07:17] and agencies are taking seriously their directives and responsibility to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars. [1:07:24] Now, I was encouraged to see the Department of Education prevented over a billion dollars [1:07:28] from going into the hands of scammers in the first year of the Trump administration. [1:07:32] As you know, Madam Secretary, the federal government must protect against increasingly sophisticated tools [1:07:37] used by scammers like AI bots and ghost student enrollments in colleges, [1:07:44] which fraudulently receive federal student aid funding. [1:07:48] Ma'am, can you describe how the Department of Education identified this fraud [1:07:53] and the steps you are taking to shore up the security of systems and further prevent improper or fraudulent payments? [1:08:00] Thank you very much, Congressman Comer. [1:08:05] You know, that's part of the FAFSA total redo that we did. [1:08:12] One of the things that we found in the FAFSA program shortly after it was totally redone [1:08:17] and applications were being submitted, we started with much more sophisticated technology, [1:08:23] a lot of AI use as well, and we started to see little flags that said to us, [1:08:29] well, this data is just not comporting correctly. [1:08:32] You know, we've got an IP address that's here and yet another address that's here. [1:08:36] Little things that technologists look for. [1:08:38] So when they went into those and then went back to that applicant and said, [1:08:42] now you have to show us a photo ID to make sure that who you are. [1:08:46] The dreaded photo ID that the members on the other side. [1:08:49] Who you are. [1:08:50] And so we started identifying with these flags that these people weren't who they said they were. [1:08:56] There were bots that had been going online, not only in this country, [1:09:00] but outside of this country as well. [1:09:02] These sort of rings were being operated, so we saw that. [1:09:07] And we were able then to stop these loans, these payments from going out, you know, for these applications. [1:09:13] In fact, one of the things that we saw when we required these photo IDs, [1:09:16] we had three applications with the same photo ID of the same person. [1:09:22] Yeah. [1:09:23] And so. [1:09:24] Amazing. [1:09:25] Amazing what a photo ID can prevent. [1:09:26] It was a small thing to put in place that suddenly just gave us an opportunity to say stop. [1:09:33] Great. [1:09:34] And so, you know, we found out there were, you know, dead people with stolen identities. [1:09:39] Oh my. [1:09:40] Like those are the ghost students, you know. [1:09:42] I'm a believer in photo IDs, I can tell you that. [1:09:45] There are people on this committee who are not. [1:09:48] And I think just in the last few weeks, we've had about $59 million, an additional $59 million saved from going out. [1:09:57] That is great. [1:09:58] Do you believe that this fraud was a result of foreign actors? [1:10:01] Some of it. [1:10:03] Are there additional resources or authorizations you believe would be helpful for Congress to provide the department in your quest to root out waste, fraud, and abuse? [1:10:14] Well, I can tell you one of the things we've done in one of our interagency agreements with the Department of State. [1:10:20] The Department of State clearly, I think, is the right place for Section, you know, 117, which is the foreign money that is coming in. [1:10:30] Right. [1:10:31] Because they can look at it and see are these foreign actors that we need to keep an eye on. [1:10:34] So I think that that's an incredibly good place for this to reside. [1:10:38] Very good. [1:10:39] Very good. [1:10:40] Madam Secretary, thank you for all of those efforts. [1:10:44] Just yesterday's Chairman of the House Oversight Committee announced the creation of a task force on defending constitutional rights and exposing institutional abuses, [1:10:53] which will hold hearings on improper payments and investigate reports of fraud within federal programs. [1:10:59] I've also introduced legislation, the Stopping Fraudulent Payments Act, which would prevent Treasury from making payments, [1:11:06] which are flagged by the Do Not Pay system, have indications that they are elevated risk of fraud, [1:11:12] or for which agencies cannot verify the identity of the recipient. [1:11:17] So I look forward to working with you on these efforts and encourage you to continue working alongside both the Education Committee [1:11:24] and Oversight Committee to assist in safeguarding these taxpayer dollars. [1:11:28] Also, Madam Secretary, very quickly, I know you're familiar with the importance of impact aid for Kentucky schools, [1:11:36] particularly Christian County, which houses Fort Campbell and Paducah Independent Schools, which are nearby, [1:11:41] and the Department of Energy's gaseous diffusion plant in my congressional district. [1:11:45] Will the impact aid program face any adjustment in light of the department's interagency agreements, [1:11:50] or how can we anticipate impact aid to be administered in the coming months? [1:11:55] No, we are continuing impact aid. [1:11:57] As a matter of fact, last year we got it out faster than it had ever gotten out before. [1:12:00] Thank you very much for that. [1:12:02] My constituents appreciate that, and I appreciate the great work you're doing at the Department of Education. [1:12:07] Mr. Chairman, I yield back. [1:12:08] The gentleman's time has expired. [1:12:10] I now recognize the gentlelady from Connecticut, Mrs. Hayes. [1:12:13] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [1:12:14] Before I begin, I'd like to enter into the record a report from the Democratic staff on the House Oversight Committee entitled [1:12:21] Professionalized Corruption, How Donald Trump is Abusing Power and Accepting Digital Kickbacks from Foreign and Criminal Interests to Cash in on the Presidency Like Never Before. [1:12:32] I'd also like to introduce an NPR article on public corruption, how the Trump administration has undermined the fight against public corruption. [1:12:40] Without objection, so ordered. [1:12:43] Thank you. [1:12:44] I think we also want to eliminate fraud. [1:12:47] Welcome, Madam Secretary. [1:12:50] Thank you. [1:12:51] Good to see the both of you here today. [1:12:53] I only have five minutes. [1:12:55] You know how this works. [1:12:56] So I want to try to get through a couple questions. [1:12:58] I want to follow up on something that my colleague said about the reclassifying of professional degrees. [1:13:05] I'm very concerned about that because it does make higher education, especially master's degree programs, more difficult to afford for nursing, social workers, teachers. [1:13:16] And as you may know, in the state of Connecticut, it is required that you have a master's degree to maintain a teaching certification. [1:13:25] I'm concerned that because although my colleagues say things like DEI nonsense, there are some marginalized communities that have ESL students, that have low income communities, that have a different set of needs that need great teachers as well. [1:13:43] And the people from those communities, people like me, should be able to go to college, get a degree, and go back and be of service in those communities. [1:13:51] So my question is, how would reclassifying these degrees and capping borrowing address the high cost of tuition? [1:13:58] And the second part of that question is, what are you doing to address the pipeline shortages in these critical areas in these high needs communities? [1:14:10] Pipeline shortages relative to which profession? [1:14:13] Nursing, teaching, social work, all of these that were reclassified and no longer considered professional degrees. [1:14:22] We're not making any kind of a judgment relative to professional degrees. [1:14:26] What we are really trying to do is bring down the cost. [1:14:30] That's what I'm asking. How does it bring down the cost? [1:14:32] Because if colleges and universities, like we've already seen... [1:14:36] Two. [1:14:37] Well, two in a week. That's not bad since the rule just went into place. And other colleges now are looking at how are they going to bring down their cost for their graduate degree programs because these caps are in place. [1:14:48] So this plan is contingent upon colleges making a good faith effort to say we're going to lower the cost of tuition, something they haven't done in years. [1:14:56] Correct. They haven't done it in years. Why? [1:14:59] Because they have been allowed. [1:15:00] Penalize the borrowers and the people who can't afford college because the people who can afford it don't apply for these programs. [1:15:05] The people who can afford it don't need student loans. [1:15:08] The people who come from communities like mine and just want to go back and serve those communities are the ones who are going to be most affected. [1:15:15] Not the colleges, not the universities, not the board of directors, not the top 1%. [1:15:18] My next question. [1:15:19] I'm a strong proponent of a Dell education, especially programs like TRIO, which again address this community of people. [1:15:27] These centers, their educational opportunity centers have been highly effective in working with adults, helping them acquire an education, training, things like GEDs, giving back to their communities and entering workforce training programs. [1:15:39] Of all the TRIO programs, it's the one most closely aligned with your administration's workforce development goals. [1:15:47] Yet, you want to propose reducing the number of those programs from 160 to about 55. [1:15:54] Can you explain the rationale behind that? [1:15:56] One of the things that we've looked at with TRIO is by their own metrics of self-reporting, they have not met their own goals. [1:16:04] And what we really want to do is to make sure that money is being spent effectively and we are, we're going to- [1:16:10] By taking it? [1:16:11] We're going to invest about $2.1 million in researching TRIO programs to see if they can be more effective in making sure that we are providing opportunities for workforce development for TRIO as well. [1:16:25] But that you're doing exactly the opposite. [1:16:28] And I can't help but think that in your mind you view this as like a caste system. [1:16:32] Like certain people deserve certain opportunities and certain people don't. [1:16:36] And the people who are affected by programs like TRIO are literally the people who need the most help, who need the most investment. [1:16:46] If there is a problem in the program or in any of these programs, you root out that part of the problem. [1:16:51] You don't zero out these programs. [1:16:54] My last question because I know I'm not going to be allowed to go over. [1:16:57] In the state of Connecticut, our Attorney General is suing the administration currently because of, in your rule that was just finalized, you talk about substantial illegal purposes, quote, are too vague for public service loan forgiveness. [1:17:15] Can you just give me an example of what might be considered a substantial illegal purpose that may disqualify an employer from participating in public service loan forgiveness? [1:17:25] Well, you know, because this is ongoing litigation, I'm not going to talk about that. [1:17:34] Okay. [1:17:37] I didn't expect you to answer it. [1:17:40] But I will just say as a final thing, we talk so much about bringing education back to the states where it always was. [1:17:47] But whenever the states intervene or try to challenge you, you don't have an answer for them. [1:17:52] With that, I yield back. [1:17:53] The gentlelady's time has expired. [1:17:56] And I recognize the gentleman from Utah, the vice chairman of this committee, Mr. Owens. [1:18:02] Madam Secretary, I want to say, first of all, thank you so much. [1:18:05] This last year and a half, we're finally getting back, we're finally getting back to pride, history of pride in my race, one that will also help the rest of America to respect my race and what we've done. [1:18:20] There's a term by soldiers and sailors when they encourage a stolen call, stolen value, valor. [1:18:28] Well, there's a term that we've been going through for so long in history, a stolen history. [1:18:33] I was blessed to be raised in a segregated community where our country, our community was very, very proud of our history because we were taught about it. [1:18:41] We were not, our heroes were not rappers and gangbangers. [1:18:45] They were Boogde Washington, Frederick Douglass, my first hero was Harriet Tubman. [1:18:52] We were taught about our proud World War II vets, proud men, courageous men that went to fight for our war. [1:19:02] We were taught about the Tuskegee Airmen or the Red Tails. [1:19:08] We were taught about the 24th Infantry Division, the group called Buffalo Soldiers. [1:19:15] And I just found out recently, my dad was one of these, a 19-year-old kid that went to the Philippines, went to Japan and fought, and he ended up being injured there. [1:19:23] We were taught about the 761st Armored Tank Battalion, the Black Panthers. [1:19:30] My uncle was an officer in that particular one. [1:19:33] My point is, our history, we need to get back, and it comes down to where we have a choice where parents can put their kids in the best schools so they can be educated, [1:19:41] to be proud, respectful, then we're winning. [1:19:44] And we're doing that for the first time in a long, long time, so I want to thank you for that. [1:19:47] We're going to get our history back, and we're going to get a very proud race and respected by the rest of the country. [1:19:54] And the Working Families Tax Cut included the first ever federal tax credit scholarship program, so the parents can get education for the best fits their child. [1:20:03] However, the program requires the state governors opt in to the program. [1:20:07] So far, about 29 or 30 states have opted in, including the state of New York, which I think is miraculous to see that happen. [1:20:14] But there are governors that refuse to give the parents an option to give their kids the very best environment. [1:20:22] What do you say to the governors that have turned their back on parents to buy the best for their kids? [1:20:29] Is there any comments on that? [1:20:31] Well, I certainly would hope that all governors would opt into this because it is such an opportunity for students and for parents to be able to make sure that their children are not, you know, in failing schools. [1:20:46] But as I mentioned before, this is private money that is going towards the scholarship granting organizations that are approved by the governors or state boards of education, [1:20:59] if or how that state, you know, works for them. [1:21:03] And we expect $2 or $3 billion to go into these funds. [1:21:09] Parents then can apply to these 501c3, these tax-free organizations, to get money to either get a scholarship to a school if their school is failing. [1:21:21] They can apply to get extra tutoring for their students. [1:21:25] If they have a child, you know, that has a disability, they can get special services for that child. [1:21:30] There are so many uses for this money if the governors, you know, will opt in. [1:21:35] And the private money comes from donors, and they are not limited as to how much they can put into these organizations. [1:21:41] They will get a $1,700 federal tax credit for their donation, but they are not limited for how much, you know, that they can donate. [1:21:50] And I have heard, I heard one, one governor who said, you know, I really don't realize when my federal, I don't understand why my fellow governors wouldn't do this. [1:22:00] Because if you're going to get a federal tax credit, well, you're in Texas or you're in another state. [1:22:06] Texas is not. [1:22:07] I just made that up. [1:22:08] But if you haven't opted in, then that donor can write that check to another state and get that credit on their federal tax return. [1:22:16] So this governor said to me, why wouldn't I want that money to come into my state? [1:22:21] So I'm going to, I'm going to make sure that my parents and my students have the opportunity, you know, to opt in to this and to take advantage of these programs. [1:22:31] Because this is real choice for parents who don't feel that their children are getting what they need. [1:22:37] And, and this is for primarily low income students who can't afford to do it in a different way. [1:22:43] This is, it's a really solid program. [1:22:45] I just want to say, I want to thank the president for surrounding himself with entrepreneurs. [1:22:49] That's what education has been lacking is lack of innovation, lack of metrics, of return on investment. [1:22:55] And we're finally going to get it. [1:22:56] And I will say this, the more parents know about this, the more they demand for their legislators, their, quote, leaders, to allow their kids to have these options. [1:23:04] So thank you so much. [1:23:05] This is kind of, this is so consequential to our future and our kids are going to, the next generation will really feel the difference. [1:23:11] So thank you so much. [1:23:12] I yield back. [1:23:13] Thank you. [1:23:15] Chairman Yales. [1:23:16] And I'll recognize the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Norcross. [1:23:18] Thank you, Chairman. [1:23:19] I'd like to thank the witness for coming in today over here. [1:23:23] Secretary McMahon, I think you and I agree that the cost of higher education in general is too damn high. [1:23:31] And students deserve that accountability for the value of these degrees. [1:23:37] Like any parent who's guiding their child, is what you're pursuing going to pay off in the end, which we all hope it will. [1:23:45] But in particular, these high needs professions, and I understand you've gotten several questions on this already, require a graduate degree that requires a student in many times to take out loans to pay for this. [1:24:04] The final rule that your department had in May of 26, that caps the loans pursuing the graduate degree. [1:24:13] Those limits are just one part of the equation. [1:24:17] The piece that we have, and particularly may have a problem with it, is listing those professional degrees. [1:24:26] And I'm sure you're aware of the 10. [1:24:28] What evidence, if any, do you have that, as stated, this is going to lower the cost of acquiring those professional degrees? [1:24:42] So what evidence have you seen or have you incurred that had you write this list the way it did? [1:24:52] Well, sir, we had not – and thank you very much for that question. [1:24:55] You know, one thing I did want to mention that I failed to mention when I was questioned before, [1:25:02] these particular programs have not been reclassified as nonprofessional. [1:25:07] They were never classified as professional degrees. [1:25:10] That just wasn't part of the equation. [1:25:12] For the purposes of these loans, there have now been different professions that have been moved in [1:25:18] that are just simply looked at for the purposes of these caps. [1:25:22] There's been no other measure that's been taken to try to bring down the cost of education. [1:25:28] Oh, I understand that, but why are these actions going to drive it down? [1:25:34] Well, I already have two colleges that are already starting to bring down their costs, [1:25:37] because they know that they're not going to be able to attract the students to these programs. [1:25:41] They did it specifically for this group that you're talking about, [1:25:44] or they did it for their entire college campus? [1:25:47] For specific – like, University of California was a business program, an MBA, and another program. [1:26:00] So they were not necessarily part of this particular – [1:26:03] Oh, great. I'd love that, that they're lowering theirs. [1:26:06] But how many colleges do we have in the United States? [1:26:09] I don't know the exact number, but – [1:26:11] Allison's? [1:26:12] I hope every one of them will take – [1:26:13] You and I are on the same page. [1:26:15] But the fact of the matter is, we've heard none. [1:26:18] We've seen nothing published that this is going to drive it down, the cost of those existing 10. [1:26:24] My question in addition to that is, if it does, I'm all in, but we're not seeing that. [1:26:30] The second part of this could be equally as important is, [1:26:35] how did this list of these 10 professions make the list? [1:26:41] What is it that you saw in these 10 professions that they need to be excluded from the lower amount? [1:26:49] We had – you know, this rulemaking process was very intense and very thorough. [1:26:56] We had roundtable discussions for about – I think it was about two weeks. [1:27:01] We had members from different communities, different professions come in and go through this whole entire process. [1:27:07] What criteria did you use to come up with the list? [1:27:11] This was a rulemaking conference that were being looked at. [1:27:19] There were many, many professions that were brought in to be looked at. [1:27:26] Right. [1:27:27] And so – [1:27:28] I'm pressing you. [1:27:29] What criteria – [1:27:30] There were a lot of organizations that were brought in. [1:27:32] At the end of the day, you get lots of comments. [1:27:33] I get it. [1:27:34] It's rulemaking. [1:27:35] But what criteria did you use to make that list of 10? [1:27:40] Well, some of it was statutory. [1:27:42] But there were other – many other businesses or whatever that were trying to come in. [1:27:46] That's a good point. [1:27:47] That's why I'm saying 10. [1:27:48] And so as we looked at this, we wanted to make sure that we weren't affecting a lot of professions that were out there. [1:27:59] So when we – you know, nursing – [1:28:01] Affecting them in which way? [1:28:02] Because it's actually – [1:28:03] So nursing came up a lot. [1:28:05] There were a lot of different organizations, different lobbyists that came in to make sure that their organizations were looked at. [1:28:12] But – [1:28:13] Ma'am, I'm getting close. [1:28:14] But – [1:28:15] The one that you added – [1:28:16] Clinical psychology. [1:28:17] But nurse practitioner, social worker, school administrator, succession occupational therapist. [1:28:23] None of those were included. [1:28:25] And the idea that this is somehow going to drive down costs. [1:28:29] Please, let's take another look at that. [1:28:32] I don't want college costs to go up. [1:28:34] But excluding these are just so important. [1:28:38] Please, I'd love to work with you. [1:28:40] We can't be cutting out those professions that we need, particularly in nursing. [1:28:45] And with that, I yield back. [1:28:47] Gentleman yields. [1:28:48] I now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Kiley. [1:28:53] Good morning, Madam Secretary. [1:28:56] I know that you have been a true champion of protecting women and girls' sports. [1:29:03] And I certainly agree with you on that, that female divisions should be reserved for biological females. [1:29:10] There – I think that the vast majority of Americans support that common sense position. [1:29:15] There are some who disagree, and we can just stipulate for our purposes today that they're entitled to their opinion. [1:29:21] And we can respectfully disagree on that. [1:29:24] But what I want to talk about today is not to wade into that particular debate. [1:29:29] But rather, to give you an example of how in California, you know, insistence on the principle of opening up the female division to biological males [1:29:41] has become so just dogmatic, so fanatical, that our state's politicians are in service of that principle, denying opportunities, [1:29:53] and putting students in a very unsafe situation for an entire school district. [1:29:59] So I represent the Tahoe Truckee Unified School District. [1:30:03] It snows a lot there. [1:30:05] And in California, there are a lot of places where it doesn't snow. [1:30:10] So the sports schedule isn't necessarily designed to accommodate snowy areas. [1:30:15] So, for example, sports like tennis or soccer are winter sports in California. [1:30:22] It's not so easy to play tennis or soccer in the middle of a huge snowstorm. [1:30:27] The ball doesn't bounce or roll all that well. [1:30:31] And then in order to go to a school where it's less snowy, where you can play those sports, [1:30:38] to get from Tahoe to schools in the foothills or Sacramento Valley, [1:30:43] you have to go over what's called the Donner Pass. [1:30:46] And just to give you a sense of how much it snows there, this is about 7,000-foot elevation. [1:30:51] It's named after the Donner Party, that actual tragedy. [1:30:55] And so it's a very dangerous mountain pass to go through. [1:31:00] And in order to compete, that's what students would have to do in this district. [1:31:04] Because of this, decades ago, the district found a solution to present students [1:31:09] with the opportunity to compete in these sports without putting them in danger. [1:31:13] And that is to compete in Nevada, because the district's right on the border of Nevada. [1:31:17] Soccer and tennis are spring sports over there. [1:31:20] So they've competed there for decades, no problem. [1:31:23] Until now, the California Department of Education has just issued an edict, a mandate, [1:31:31] saying that after decades of competing in Nevada, this district is now required to come and compete in California. [1:31:38] And to, you know, go over the Donner Pass in incredibly dangerous, snowy conditions. [1:31:43] What is the reason for this? [1:31:44] Because Nevada does not have a policy of opening up its female division to biological males. [1:31:50] And so the California Department of Education determined, even though this has been going on for decades, [1:31:55] that by competing in Nevada and giving students the opportunity to compete there in safe conditions, [1:32:01] they are violating California law. [1:32:03] And so now the entire district is being forced by mandate by the Department of Education [1:32:08] to move into California and compete there. [1:32:11] So I just wanted to bring this to your attention, get your reaction to it, and see if you had any thoughts [1:32:16] for how we can help these students and families out. [1:32:19] Well, I certainly had not heard of that situation before. [1:32:25] But clearly, I just want to be, you know, respectful of making sure that relative to Title IX, [1:32:31] we do not have men competing in women's sports. [1:32:35] I think the president has made that very clear. [1:32:38] It is certainly being, you know, upheld in the law. [1:32:41] And when we have had men competing in women's sports, [1:32:44] we've had women injured in those sports when those competitions were held. [1:32:49] You know, the volleyball competition where a woman's nose, you know, was broken. [1:32:54] We've had, you know, other injuries. [1:32:57] We had a fencer who took a knee rather than compete in that competition for fear that she would be injured, [1:33:04] you know, by, you know, a male opponent who was participating in that sport. [1:33:08] So I think we have to be incredibly mindful of Title IX. [1:33:12] I was very happy with some of the results we had, like for the University of Pennsylvania. [1:33:17] They actually took away the medal that had been awarded to Leah Thomas [1:33:23] to give it to the rightful competitor. [1:33:25] And they apologized to the women who had been competed against, you know, by, you know, by a male athlete [1:33:33] to make sure that there was a level and fair playing field. [1:33:38] And that, and we want to make sure that women aren't put in harm's way relative to these sports and their participation. [1:33:45] So I'm sorry to hear about this issue in California. [1:33:48] I hope that the governor or State Board of Education who's putting these rules in place would reconsider. [1:33:55] Thank you very much. I yield back. [1:33:58] I thank the gentleman. [1:34:00] I now recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Kassar. [1:34:03] Mr. Chair, I'd like to enter into the record a report from the Democratic staff of the Senate Help Committee, [1:34:10] which found that the Office of Civil Rights reached the 12-year low last year in protecting students from discrimination. [1:34:16] It's titled Justice Denied How Trump's Office of Civil Rights Reached the 12-Year Low in Protecting Students from Discrimination Reaching Zero Resolution Agreements in 2025. [1:34:26] Without objection, so ordered. [1:34:28] Good morning, Secretary McMahon. [1:34:31] We're here to talk about the budget for the Department of Education. [1:34:35] So I'd like to ask you a couple of questions about school funding and funding in our schools. [1:34:41] Can you tell me how much more or less it costs to give a child free lunch at a public school? [1:34:46] Well, the Department of Education does not control—that's not part of our budget. [1:34:50] I know, but when the USDA does that funding, it's about $4.60 for a school lunch. [1:34:57] Do you know about how much the average school teacher makes at a public school per year? [1:35:04] That varies across different states, anywhere from 40-some thousand to 90-some thousand. [1:35:09] That's right. Yeah, that's right. It's about $64,000 on average nationwide. [1:35:13] So here's an easy one because it's all over the news. [1:35:18] Can you tell us how much Congress is being asked to vote on next week for President Trump's ballroom? [1:35:25] I don't know that answer. [1:35:28] It's a billion dollars. [1:35:30] And you're a businesswoman, so I'm hoping you can help me do some math here. [1:35:34] $4.60 for a school lunch, a billion dollars for a ballroom. [1:35:39] Can you tell me about how many free school lunches that billion dollars could pay for? [1:35:44] It is my understanding on the ballroom—excuse me, and I've heard the President say this—taxpayer dollars will not be used to build the ballroom, but they are donations from private enterprise. [1:35:56] So, Mr. Chairman, I'll have entered into the record some Republicans—this article from NBC yesterday—some Republicans aren't sold on $1 billion price tag for Trump's ballroom project in party-line GOP bill. [1:36:08] Without objection? [1:36:09] We are voting on $1 billion in taxpayer dollars in addition to those private donations. [1:36:15] And so for those billion dollars in taxpayer dollars, at $4.60 a lunch, that is 217,391,304 lunches. [1:36:26] That's lunch for more than a million kids, a million Americans, for the entire school year. [1:36:32] But let's say that we're not going to talk about lunches, because that's USDA. [1:36:36] We can talk about teachers. [1:36:38] At $64,000 a year, do we know how many new teachers we could hire if we sent a billion dollars out to the states for reducing class sizes and hiring more teachers? [1:36:50] I'm sure you have that number. [1:36:52] Yes, it is 15,000 more teachers. [1:36:55] Or we could pay for the Office of Civil Rights that's being cut in this budget seven times over. [1:37:00] I think you get the point. [1:37:03] So here's my real question here. [1:37:05] As Secretary of Education, which do you think helps our nation more? [1:37:12] Getting free lunch to more than a million more kids, 15,000 more teachers, or the ballroom? [1:37:22] I think those are incredibly weird comparisons. [1:37:27] I do believe that our teachers should be paid well for what they do. [1:37:31] I think teachers are underpaid. [1:37:33] I think teachers should also be paid for performance. [1:37:36] And I would like to see us have our teachers be compensated. [1:37:40] I'd like to also see that there would be teachers who were paid more than administrators in schools. [1:37:47] We have more administrators, you know, and they're paid higher salaries than our teachers are. [1:37:52] And I think state budgets, all of that, should take all of that into consideration when they're hiring their teachers because it is state budgets. [1:37:59] Then I do think it is weird that next week, like you said, it's a weird question because it's weird that next week we're being asked to vote for a billion dollars for a ballroom while there are cuts to the Department of Education and cuts to education. [1:38:14] In my own community in Austin, Texas, they are about to cut 200 positions at Austin ISD, close 10 schools. [1:38:23] This budget makes it worse by cutting the equivalent of about 400 teachers' salaries in my district. [1:38:29] So I'm asking for you as being a member of Donald Trump's cabinet to tell us, do you support a billion dollars for the ballroom when we could use that billion dollars to raise teacher salaries, as you've said, or use that billion dollars to hire 15,000 more teachers? [1:38:48] How can you defend the ballroom or do you defend the ballroom if we could use that billion dollars for the needs of our kids and our schools? [1:38:55] Congressman, those budgets that you're alluding to are state budgets, they're not federal budgets. [1:39:00] But we send money to the states and their school districts and they hire teachers, right? [1:39:05] Teacher salaries come out of state budgets, they don't come out of federal budgets. [1:39:09] When we send federal money to schools and then they hire teachers. [1:39:14] When you send Title I money to schools, when they get grants from the federal government, they hire staff. [1:39:20] They hire teachers. [1:39:21] They're getting a cut here. [1:39:22] We could send a billion dollars more, but it sounds like you don't want to defend Donald Trump's ballroom here. [1:39:29] I think the ballroom has many different opportunities, and the president has alluded to them. [1:39:35] I think we saw one just recently when there was an attempted assassination on the president's life in a ballroom that was [1:39:44] not secure. [1:39:45] Right, and of course that was horrific and unacceptable. [1:39:49] The question before us is, if we were to vote on an extra billion dollars, do you think it should go to our kids and education, [1:39:56] or to this East Ballroom project? [1:39:59] I think we need to look at the budget overall in its entirety. [1:40:03] And I think the gentleman's time has expired. [1:40:05] I yield back. [1:40:06] Yields back, and I recognize the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Rulli. [1:40:11] Well, thank you, Chairman, Madam Secretary. [1:40:14] One of the main elementary and secondary education incentives is the proposed budget to Make Education Great Again Grant. [1:40:24] The $2 billion grant's goal is to provide streamlined, flexible funding directly to the states. [1:40:31] From my time on the school board, I support moving away from a top-down approach and moving towards a localized model, [1:40:38] a bottom-up approach, if you would. [1:40:41] Money is always diluted at the federal level through waste and administration fees. [1:40:45] As a school board member for many years, I always worked with the treasurer's office. [1:40:51] And the treasurer's office was always obsessed by the amount of money that the state was going to allocate to them for their budget. [1:40:58] And it was always changing. [1:41:00] In my personal opinion, I always saw it as a way that the federal government lost a lot of the money up top, [1:41:05] and it never made its way down. [1:41:07] But with this grant program, we're going to be putting it right directly into the localized people, which is what we want. [1:41:12] So my first question to you today, Madam Secretary, can you tell me why this grant is such a big impact on local schools? [1:41:19] The mega-grant you're talking about? [1:41:20] Yes. [1:41:21] The $2 billion? [1:41:22] I've had governors all across the country, as I've toured and met with them and talked with them, [1:41:29] they have asked for programs to have more of a block grant, which this will be looking at, [1:41:36] because they know where and how to spend the money. [1:41:40] They know what programs are needed in their state. [1:41:43] And they have asked, you know, for the ability to process and to spend that money where they want to spend it, [1:41:52] without all of the red tape and the strings attached to it that come with so many of our grant programs. [1:41:58] And so we've heard governors loud and clear. [1:42:01] I think this is a much more efficient way of the grant funding. [1:42:04] And by the way, you know, it doesn't affect any of the Title I-A programs or the IDEA money, [1:42:10] because all of that is formulaic, and that is in law. [1:42:13] So none of that is affected. [1:42:15] This is the grant programs that would be going to the states. [1:42:18] Are you hopeful to see really good outcomes coming in with perhaps test scores or something by us doing this? [1:42:24] Well, I would hope that, yes. [1:42:26] Well, it would certainly be our goal that governors would know what programs that they need to institute. [1:42:32] And again, you know, we are saying that we want 50 percent of these programs reserved for 25 percent going for literacy programs, [1:42:42] another 25 percent going for numeracy programs. [1:42:45] We failed our kids. [1:42:47] They can't read and they cannot do math at the proficient levels. [1:42:52] And so by putting this reservation, we don't control curriculum. [1:42:56] We're not saying to governors, you've got to put in this program, you've got to put in that program. [1:43:00] But we are saying 25 percent has to go to numeracy and 25 percent must go to literacy programs. [1:43:07] Thank you for that answer, Madam Secretary. [1:43:10] I want to change gears a little bit. [1:43:12] Madam Secretary, I want to give you an opportunity to correct the record. [1:43:15] I have a colleague that asked a graduate level nursing program of the Secretary's former college, Sacred Heart University. [1:43:22] My colleague said the total cost of this program is $80,000, stating that this was way above the limit. [1:43:28] Is this true or do you have any comments on that? [1:43:31] Well, I don't – when I looked at it and thought about that for a second, [1:43:35] I don't believe any of the nursing programs at Sacred Heart University and the graduate program are impacted by this. [1:43:41] I really appreciate all your hard work, Madam Secretary. [1:43:45] With that, I yield my time back to the chair. [1:43:47] I thank the gentleman for his efficiency. [1:43:51] And I recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Mania. [1:43:55] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [1:43:58] Thank you, Secretary McMahon, for being here today. [1:44:01] And I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you earlier this week and you making the time both then and today. [1:44:09] As you know and as we discussed, I have concerns about the Department's budget request as well as many of the developments that have happened within the Department of Education and a shift away from it. [1:44:22] We're just talking about literacy, which is something that I'm very passionate about. [1:44:27] And I think everybody in this room is. [1:44:30] I spent nearly 30 years in a classroom and I'm married to an elementary school teacher who's what I would consider and others do an expert in reading and literacy intervention. [1:44:43] So one of the things that I am concerned about are the proposed cuts to various programs that serve students in low income and high poverty schools. [1:44:55] While I do acknowledge and appreciate that the budget maintains funding for Title I, there are other components that I'm afraid will be harmful. [1:45:04] For example, one proposal is to eliminate the full service community schools program, which funds comprehensive academic, social and health services for children and families in high poverty schools. [1:45:21] I have visited some of these community schools and seen the programs that exist and they don't just exist in urban settings. [1:45:30] Poverty is not exclusive to urban settings. [1:45:33] In fact, as one of my colleagues over here referenced Harriet Tubman, who spent the last 55 years of her life in my district, the district office for the school district is named after her. [1:45:44] And many people have difficulty accessing health care and kids accessing mental health care. [1:45:52] And our schools, especially our community schools serve as one of the hubs of that location, sometimes the only access that individuals have. [1:46:02] In addition, you propose to consolidate 21st century community learning centers program, which funds before and after school programs. [1:46:11] And this and my last statement really have to do with the literacy piece. [1:46:15] We want to make sure that our kids have every opportunity to achieve their goals and they're not going to achieve those goals unless they have high reading levels. [1:46:25] So I know that we share this concern and I do not want to see these cuts. [1:46:30] We want to make sure that they're in settings during school, before school, after school with trained professionals that can help them achieve their literacy goals. [1:46:39] And the only way that that is going to happen is if they're well funded. [1:46:44] I also am proud to say that through this committee, I had a piece of legislation unanimously pass, obviously therefore with bipartisan support called the science of reading legislation to make sure that our kids are learning in an evidence based way. [1:47:02] And I represented many teachers who were resistant to those changes and I'm all for teacher autonomy, but I saw many of them that went through this pilot program, see the good that comes from in the science based learning. [1:47:16] These school districts, especially those in high poverty areas, are going to need that funding, need critical funding. [1:47:23] And I know 25% of some of that grant funding is going specifically towards literacy, but I'm afraid that with the cuts, especially in these high poverty areas, that they're going to need additional funding. [1:47:35] So I ask that you consider additional investment, especially as we target these changes to literacy that are going to need investment for new curriculum, teacher training and additional support for families. [1:47:52] So I appreciate that. [1:47:54] The last thing that I want to mention after, you know, encouraging you to do so is related to what we've discussed earlier today, which is the scholarship granting organization. [1:48:04] So you have mentioned that we need to return education to the states. [1:48:09] Will the states have the ability to set rules around these scholarship granting organizations? [1:48:21] And in some ways, some of the questions might be assuring that there will be scholarships dedicated to low income families or minority families or public institutions. [1:48:34] Will the school boards or the boards of regents or the governors have control over that at the state level? [1:48:41] Yes, that'll be done at the state. [1:48:44] Of course, the 501 status is granted through, you know, the federal government. [1:48:49] But those decisions would be made at the state level. [1:48:51] Gotcha. [1:48:52] So they will be able to set rules around scholarship granting organizations and the scholarships themselves? [1:48:59] That is my understanding. [1:49:00] Thank you. [1:49:01] I yield back. [1:49:02] I thank the gentleman. [1:49:03] I recognize the gentleman from Wisconsin. [1:49:05] Mr. Grothman. [1:49:06] Thank you very much. [1:49:07] First, I want to clear up or comment on some of the comments made in the past by some of the other legislators. [1:49:13] There's sometimes an implication that we need to put more money in so-called poverty related districts to help them. [1:49:21] In Wisconsin, and talking to other legislators, it's frequently true of other states, Milwaukee, the so-called poverty district, they are some of the highest spending districts in the state. [1:49:34] In part because the Fed, in part because the state government floods money into the urban areas in a failed effort to prop up the test scores. [1:49:45] So their problem is not a lack of money. [1:49:49] Second comment, I was disappointed to see, and I should have talked to you about this on the phone the other day, Ms. Secretary, that we are putting more money into Pell Grants. [1:50:00] A problem with Pell Grants is there's a huge marriage penalty associated with them. [1:50:06] I'll always remember, and I've heard other people tell me as well, but some gal, when I talked about the marriage penalty connected to Pell Grants, she said, [1:50:15] I mean, me and my husband got married before we had a child, but none of my friends are getting married, they get free college. [1:50:22] So I think, I really think we shouldn't be increasing Pell Grants, because there is a huge disincentive to get married in there. [1:50:34] And with regard to mental health, I just got done reading a book, I think the mental health professionals are overwhelmingly over-drugging our young people. [1:50:44] And, you know, there's a feeling like if we throw money at it, it's going to solve it. [1:50:48] But given the current mental health establishment, I would not trust them with any more power in our society. [1:50:56] I think they are over-drugging our kids. [1:50:59] In any event, now, now, back to the question. [1:51:03] One of the things I notice in my schools is that over time, the number of special ed kids, [1:51:16] which could be learning disabled, it could be emotionally disturbed, whatever, goes up. [1:51:22] It's gone up dramatically over the last 20 years. [1:51:25] I can't believe kids are that much worse off. [1:51:28] And sometimes, when I talk to local school districts about what we can do about this, [1:51:35] they say, oh, it's all federal rules. [1:51:37] I don't believe that, but I wondered if you could look into anything we can do about the exploding number of special ed kids in school. [1:51:49] And by the way, I think it's horrible to label any kid emotionally disturbed, and they do it routinely. [1:51:55] But go ahead. [1:51:56] I'm happy, you know, to work with you and to see what your concerns are. [1:52:03] You know, we pretty much, I have now visited, I think it was about 20-some groups that have real concerns about IDEA, [1:52:18] about, you know, kids with, you know, disabilities that do need special attention. [1:52:26] I've been in those classes, you know, but parents really are the ones who primarily decide that their child is, needs, you know, [1:52:35] has a disability or special needs, other than severely physical. [1:52:39] And so they work with teachers, you know, in their states. [1:52:43] And it's, this is not a federal, the federal government doesn't go in and say, this child is disabled. [1:52:50] That's decided, you know, at the state level. [1:52:52] As I understand it, the rules on determining who is disabled and who is not are developed by the Department of Education. [1:53:03] And insofar as we have more kids in special education, therefore, in part, the local governments would argue, we don't have a choice. [1:53:13] It's the federal government who is making us label these people. [1:53:17] And just to understand that, that's where my concern. [1:53:22] So there are, there are, I think there are 13 categories, you know, for disabilities that are decided at the Department of Education. [1:53:30] So those are the ones that are in place. [1:53:32] Okay. [1:53:34] My next question is with regard to AbilityOne jobs, jobs for people who've been born with certain disabilities, spina bifida, Down syndrome, that sort of thing. [1:53:52] And the Biden administration, I think, tried to take away opportunities from these, from these folks. [1:53:58] A lot of times those opportunities mean paying sub-minimum wage jobs. [1:54:03] But it's so important for these people to be like their brothers and sisters and going to work every day and getting the extensive accomplishment that comes with getting a paycheck. [1:54:13] The Biden administration was hostile to these programs. [1:54:19] And I wondered if you can comment on them or if you have an opinion as to whether or not we should be allowing, say, 18-year-olds, when it's sometimes obvious. [1:54:31] The gentleman's time has expired. [1:54:32] We're not going to make seven bucks, whether or not we could make sure we stay in the programs. [1:54:39] Well, I do think we need, we can have that coordinated effort, you know, those with disabilities working with those who are not disabled to help that program and that process along. [1:54:51] Well, I'm not sure that's what I was looking for, but okay. [1:54:55] The gentleman's time has expired. [1:54:57] Pursuant to the previous order, the chair declares the committee in recess. [1:55:01] Subject to the call of the chair, we plan to reconvene promptly, please, in five minutes. [1:55:06] Thank you. The committee now stands in recess. [2:03:40] The committee will reconvene and come to order following our recess. [2:03:43] I now recognize the gentlelady from North Carolina, Ms. Adams. [2:03:47] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Secretary McMahon, for being here. [2:03:51] Good to see you again. [2:03:53] I had to run out, but I'm glad I'm able to get back and ask you a few questions. [2:03:59] I do want to ask about the department's backlog of public service loan forgiveness, buyback applications. [2:04:07] As of the end of March, there were more than 89,000 borrowers who were still waiting for their PSLF buyback applications to be processed. [2:04:17] According to reports, some borrowers have been waiting now for more than a year just to receive a determination from the department. [2:04:27] And so if we think about the current processing pace, some estimates show that it could take up to more than two years to clear the existing backlog. [2:04:38] That's a very long time. [2:04:40] We're talking about teachers and nurses and public defenders and other borrowers who follow the rules of trying to access relief that they may already qualify for. [2:04:52] So could you share briefly what specific steps that the department is taking right now to reduce the backlog and speed up the processing for these borrowers? [2:05:11] Thank you very much, Congresswoman, for that. [2:05:17] You know, there was an incredible backlog that was a result of the save plan during the Biden administration. [2:05:24] And there were so many borrowers who said, you know, well, if my loan is going to be forgiven, you know, why why should I worry about paying it back? [2:05:34] And so we we really addressed this backlog now that the the save plan is no more. [2:05:41] It was found to be unconstitutional. [2:05:43] And we're very happy with the president's new proposal that, you know, the Working Families Tax Cuts Act, [2:05:50] that we're going to have these very specific ways that borrowers can repay their back loans. [2:05:57] And so it's going to be much simpler. [2:06:00] And in the and in the interim, they will be able to pick whatever program they want that is now in place. [2:06:11] They can sign up for those programs or they can go immediately into the new RAP program or the standard payback program. [2:06:18] And that's going to really clean this up and it's going to be much more effective and efficient. [2:06:25] OK, thank you. [2:06:26] You know, right now, one of the the only reasons that the public even knows that the size of the backlog is because the department agreed to release the data through ongoing litigation brought by the American Federation of Teachers. [2:06:40] And so that reporting is expected to end soon. [2:06:43] Well, this information is important, not for just for borrowers, but for Congress and for public accountability. [2:06:50] So thank you for your question. [2:06:51] So today I'm asking a question. [2:06:56] Will you commit to continuing regular public reporting on the PSLF backlog processing programs through the Federal Student Aid Data Center website? [2:07:07] Because you are using your website to report that. [2:07:09] Certainly. [2:07:10] OK, great. [2:07:11] So thank you. [2:07:12] And we're going to follow up on that. [2:07:14] But so let me also want to briefly touch on educator preparation and HBCUs. [2:07:20] And, you know, I'm an HBCU graduate twice. [2:07:24] I taught 40 years on the campus. [2:07:26] I've been at college. [2:07:27] But the president's fiscal 2027 budget eliminates funding for the Augustus F. Harkins Centers of Excellence, [2:07:36] which supports teacher preparation programs at HBCUs and minority serving institutions during a national teacher shortage. [2:07:45] So if Congress appropriates funding for the Harkins program, will the department distribute those funds to schools that increase diversity in the educator profession as required by law? [2:08:00] Yes, you know, we've been actively working with HBCUs. [2:08:06] I've been very pleased to have met personally with many of them. [2:08:11] I'm very happy that our partnership program is coming back in place. [2:08:15] The Board of Advisors is certainly going to be filled soon. [2:08:19] And I'm very pleased of the working relationship we have with HBCUs. [2:08:24] And I feel really good about continuing to build that relationship. [2:08:30] So that's a yes on the Hawkins? [2:08:32] Excuse me? [2:08:34] Is that a yes on the? [2:08:35] We will certainly fund those programs that are passed. [2:08:39] Very good. [2:08:40] Let me ask you real quick. [2:08:41] I just introduced yesterday, actually, the bipartisan Ignite HBCU Excellence Act to address deferred maintenance and infrastructure challenges, [2:08:51] because infrastructure affects whether institutions can compete for research grants, [2:08:56] to recruit faculty, to prepare students for today's workforce. [2:08:59] And so I hope that the department will continue, and we appreciate all the work that you've done, [2:09:03] will continue to work with us in Congress and with our institutions to better understand and address their longstanding needs. [2:09:10] Appreciate that very much. [2:09:12] Thank you very much. [2:09:14] And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. [2:09:15] I thank the gentlelady. [2:09:16] I now recognize the gentleman from Guam, Mr. Moylan. [2:09:20] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:09:22] Madam Secretary, good conversation with you yesterday. [2:09:26] Thank you for that call. [2:09:28] And I understand the administration has laid out your vision that education decisions should return to the states and territories and local communities. [2:09:37] So I agree with this. [2:09:38] In theory, it makes sense as long as those systems function effectively. [2:09:42] But some jurisdictions, like Guam in the territory, we see far too often serious concerns about performance, infrastructure, [2:09:51] and system management. [2:09:52] So just wondering or thinking about, has the department taken measures or responsibilities to ensure that these jurisdictions are actually prepared for greater autonomy? [2:10:08] And if the local systems continue failing students, is there a point the department believes stronger federal intervention or oversight becomes necessary? [2:10:20] Thank you for that. [2:10:22] Thank you for that. [2:10:23] And it is, you know, something that we talked about yesterday. [2:10:27] I know that one of the things that you talked about also was, you know, workforce shortages, you know, in Guam. [2:10:34] And how could we address making sure we had more skilled labor, you know, to fill jobs? [2:10:39] And it was a good discussion that we had relative to the programs that the Department of Education, you know, was putting in place, [2:10:49] you know, through, you know, workforce Pell, as we've talked about earlier. [2:10:54] And we want to make sure that we can get people into the workforce, you know, in Guam to help raise, you know, that level in the economy. [2:11:02] Thank you. And also with the president's focus on the federal dollars to prevent any waste or fraud and abuse. [2:11:13] How can we assure that the federal government still has some oversight on this funding that's going directly to the states and territories? [2:11:20] Well, you know, in our mega grants, one of the things that I've said is that we're looking to have, you know, 25 percent towards literacy and 25 percent towards math. [2:11:32] And we'll continue to have, you know, that oversight for that money that is going in. [2:11:37] Okay. Good. Good to hear. [2:11:38] And I'm glad to hear you're going through so many states as you travel and listen to the governors, too. [2:11:44] And I think it'd be great if you can come to Guam. [2:11:47] I'd love to come to Guam. [2:11:48] There you go. Okay. [2:11:50] Looking forward to that. [2:11:51] And you can see how we're doing as well as we move forward with these initiatives. [2:11:55] I thank you for that. [2:11:56] And also my constituents has concerns and uncertainty surrounding the potential of the closure of the U.S. Department of Education. [2:12:06] And they come to me asking about how programs might operate and who will receive the fundings and who will administer it. [2:12:14] And through the Department of Interagency Agreements, the IAAs, the administration has been simplified on how these programs are run. [2:12:23] So could you elaborate for my constituents how these IAAs function in practice and what it means for educators and schools? [2:12:34] Well, thank you. [2:12:35] And it's one of the things that you and I talked about yesterday. [2:12:39] For instance, the first IAA that we have signed and implemented, you know, was with the Department of Labor. [2:12:46] And, you know, the funding is still with, you know, the Department of Education. [2:12:53] We're co-administering this program. [2:12:55] And we've been very pleased with the success that we've had so far. [2:13:01] We have actually gone ahead and sent grants out for 3,000 different programs over 57 states for about a billion dollars. [2:13:10] And so that process has been seamless. [2:13:12] So those who are receiving those grants wouldn't really know if that's coming from the Department of Education or coming through the Department of Labor System. [2:13:20] So the goal and to reassure your constituent is that the programs and processes that are in place will continue to serve those constituents, you know, without without interruption. [2:13:33] And that's the proof of concept that I'm envisioning with the other IAA agreements to make sure that your constituents and taxpayers don't see issues, you know, with these programs as they are being continued to be fulfilled. [2:13:53] Thank you, Madam Secretary. [2:13:56] I'm looking forward to your visit in Guam. [2:13:58] Be happy to escort you around the islands to visit our different schools, especially. [2:14:03] Thank you so much. [2:14:04] Mr. Chair, yield. [2:14:06] I thank the gentleman. [2:14:07] I recognize the gentlelady from the beautiful state of Michigan. [2:14:11] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [2:14:12] I'd like to enter into the record a letter from the Association for Career and Technical Education and Advance CTE expressing their concern that the integrity of career and technical education is threatened by its move to the Department of Labor. [2:14:28] Without objection. [2:14:29] So ordered. [2:14:30] Thank you. [2:14:31] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [2:14:33] Secretary McMahon, as you have heard by now, we have some serious concerns about the leadership at the Department of Education. [2:14:41] As we all know, the President of the United States is in China at this moment meeting with our adversaries and putting Michigan's auto manufacturing sector at risk. [2:14:56] Earlier this year, he told a crowd of people in my home state that we should just let China come on in and sell Chinese cars in the United States. [2:15:07] It's unmanageable. [2:15:09] At a time when our economy is changing and the President is attempting to undermine one of our nation's most important industries, we cannot be making it harder for Michigan workers to compete. [2:15:22] Secretary McMahon, Secretary McMahon, your attempts to shutter the Department will cause chaos for career and technical education in our country. [2:15:30] The Perkins Grant is a federal program that distributes money to states to fund shop classes, hands-on learning, and apprenticeship programs. [2:15:38] The chaotic attempt by this administration to transfer Perkins funding to the Department of Labor, an agency with no experience running Perkins programming, will only create more bureaucracy and hurdles for students. [2:15:52] To make matters worse, the administration wants to make community colleges ineligible for Perkins grants and end all support for post-secondary career and technical education programs. [2:16:05] It's going to be a huge blow to a critical piece of our workforce development pipeline in Michigan. [2:16:13] At a time when millions of Americans are joyfully choosing to work with their hands and pursue careers in the trades, we need to invest in programs that teach valuable skills and offer paths to the middle class with good paying jobs. [2:16:31] Madam Secretary, can you explain how eliminating federal support for Perkins career and technical education funding at community colleges helps better prepare students in my home state of Michigan for successful careers? [2:16:47] Well, thank you very much. [2:16:49] I can tell you that what I am seeing across the country is a kind of renewed cooperation between community colleges and our high schools. [2:17:00] And in many areas, the programs that are being taught now in high schools, we eliminated shop class and vocational skill training from many of our schools for many years. [2:17:10] We now have a workforce shortage. [2:17:12] I know the president actually eradicated STEM education grants from the National Science Foundation. [2:17:18] I also sit on the science committee. [2:17:20] And as someone who remembers when he signed my legislation, bipartisan legislation, called the Building Blocks of STEM Act, we know that will directly impact shop class programs. [2:17:29] And I think it's clear that this is this move is not going to make Michiganders achieve the paths for high paying middle class jobs. [2:17:39] And so just shifting gears, obviously, you're here today to defend the budget that would cut eight billion for K through 12 programs, some of which come from programs to recruit and retain our teaching workforce. [2:17:50] As you know, we are experiencing an urgent and increasing teacher shortage in my home state and frankly, across the country. [2:17:58] Over the past decade, the percentage of teaching vacancies in Michigan has tripled, according to a recent report from Michigan State University. [2:18:06] It's no surprise why the average salary for public school teachers in Michigan is at the starting level is $41,645, while the minimum living wage for an adult with one child is $62,245, according to the Economic Policy Institute. [2:18:27] So Secretary McMahon, at a time when we are losing teachers, why would we slash the program that we know works to recruit and train more of them? [2:18:36] You know, I do think that sometimes Ed has not done a very good job at supporting our teachers. [2:18:44] And I'd like to I'd like to see, you know, that change where, you know, we're we're too disconnected from their work. [2:18:51] And the states really need to look at that. [2:18:53] I think teachers should be paid more. [2:18:55] I think that they should be rewarded for performance with their students. [2:19:01] Well, thank you. [2:19:02] And I'm highly I'm highly supportive of our teachers. [2:19:04] And I do believe that state budgets should be increased to pay for those. [2:19:09] Yeah, and I think it's clear that cuts are only going to exacerbate issues that we are really trying to solve. [2:19:15] And so it's time for real solutions like my Addressing Teacher Shortages Act. [2:19:20] It's not the time to be abandoning our nation's school districts. [2:19:24] So I just want to be clear, Madam Secretary. [2:19:26] I am opposed to the efforts to dismantle the Department of Education, and I urge you to change course. [2:19:32] Our kids' futures depend on it. [2:19:34] I yield back. [2:19:35] I thank the gentlelady. [2:19:36] I now recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. McKenzie. [2:19:40] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Madam Secretary, for joining us today. [2:19:44] My first question is relating to health care professions and particularly nurses. [2:19:50] In our district, we have a very vibrant health care industry with thousands of people who are employed in the space, [2:19:58] providing quality, accessible health care for our residents. [2:20:02] My late grandmother was even an RN herself. [2:20:05] Today, we face a shortage of skilled nurses, though. [2:20:09] And so we are trying to figure out ways to get more people into these fields, which are great, high-paying professions, can be long-term careers. [2:20:19] On the flip side, we have another concern, which is overburdening individuals with student loan debt. [2:20:26] And that is something that has been going on for a long time. [2:20:30] And so we want to make sure as people go and get the education they need to get into these positions that they don't end up with too much debt that they can't manage for many years. [2:20:40] So with the recent change in the student loan caps that was put in place to make sure that people weren't getting overburdened and going into professions where they couldn't repay their debt, [2:20:52] at the same time trying to figure out how we get as many people into those skilled professions in health care like nursing. [2:20:58] So please help explain the department's approach in aligning education and workforce, particularly in the health care field and nursing. [2:21:07] Well, thank you very much for those comments. [2:21:12] You know, when I look at the nursing shortage, one of the things that we discovered with our research is that the real crux of nursing shortage really is in our RN program or the undergraduate programs. [2:21:30] And none of the loan caps that have been put in place, you know, was impacting those programs at all. [2:21:36] So I'm really hopeful. [2:21:38] You know, I'm not quite sure what we need to do, you know, to attract more nurses. [2:21:45] I have heard from supervisors that there are a lot of nurses going into the profession that don't really want to do a lot of the bedside nursing. [2:21:54] They want to go into, you know, some of the other careers in nursing. [2:21:58] And so we need to make sure that we can have programs in place that can fulfill that nursing need. [2:22:05] And one of the quickest ways to get to an RN program is that you can take a two-year certificate program and then apply for the test for an RN. [2:22:16] And if you pass that test, you can get your RN license. [2:22:19] Then you can go on while you're working to get your bachelor's program. [2:22:23] But it's a very quick way to get into the nursing program. [2:22:26] So I think if we sort of make some of that information available to nursing programs that we can get more nurses, you know, into the profession for that primary shortage, you know, that we're seeing. [2:22:40] We're not seeing so much a shortage in the graduate level with nurse practitioners because we actually are pretty much fulfilling that need at this point. [2:22:52] But the real shortage is coming, you know, at the RN level and at the undergraduate level. [2:22:57] So let's make sure we can provide pathways for them to get into the marketplace faster. [2:23:02] That career pathway approach that you're talking about is something we utilize in our area, both of our large health networks. [2:23:09] Take that approach and have individuals who have maybe a two-year certificate and then get into a job and help move them along that career ladder to get into a BSN. [2:23:20] So that is a great approach. [2:23:22] And I think there is certainly... [2:23:24] If I could add to that too, sorry to interrupt, but if I could add to that too, there are many hospitals that are very willing to help them for their nurses to go into the bachelor program once they have that certification. [2:23:37] They're willing to provide and help with that tuition. [2:23:40] So I think nurses also can look for those hospitals that would help with those programs. [2:23:47] Absolutely. [2:23:48] And look forward to continuing to work with you on this issue to make sure we have skilled individuals in the nursing profession. [2:23:53] The second question that I have is relating to go students, individuals who are not actually students, maybe not actually matriculating, not on the rolls. [2:24:02] Significant fraud in California alone. [2:24:04] The state chancellor's office estimated that 25% of community college applicants in 2024 were bots. [2:24:11] And your department has now prevented more than $1 billion in fraudulent payments by restoring basic identity verification that the prior administration had abandoned. [2:24:22] Please tell me more about your efforts to crack down on fraud because this can have a real pernicious impact on regular families who are doing the right thing and applying. [2:24:30] It can send a demand signal that maybe a university needs to raise tuition or restrict the number of actual students in their programs. [2:24:39] So it can really distort the market. [2:24:41] Please tell me what you're doing to crack down on that kind of action. [2:24:44] Well, just to reiterate, through our FAFSA program, we have really started to be able to identify fraudulent applications that are coming through. [2:24:55] Through the verification process with photo IDs, with looking, using our technology and AI programs to, you know, to see flags that have come up. [2:25:07] And I mentioned earlier about, you know, where IP addresses are relative to physical addresses. [2:25:12] And just things are not making sense that we then go back in and look at to verify with student ID showing, you know, showing an actual ID. [2:25:20] We actually found that there was three particular applications that had the same student ID photo on them. [2:25:27] So we are we are rooting out more and more of those fraudulent applications. [2:25:31] And our FAFSA program has really been tightened so that bots aren't getting go students are being identified. [2:25:39] And we are saving taxpayers. [2:25:41] Thank you. [2:25:42] Thank you. [2:25:43] The gentleman's time has expired. [2:25:44] I now recognize. [2:25:45] Excuse me, Mr. Chair. [2:25:46] I have. [2:25:47] Would like to submit something for the record. [2:25:49] Pardon? [2:25:50] I would like to submit something for the record. [2:25:51] Well, I haven't recognized you yet. [2:25:53] That's why I'm asking to submit something for the record. [2:25:55] Well, let me let me recognize you and then you can submit something for the record. [2:25:58] Thank you, sir. [2:26:00] I now recognize the gentle lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Lee. [2:26:03] Yes, but I would like to submit something for the record. [2:26:05] That is not against my time. [2:26:08] Okay. [2:26:09] I would like to enter to the record a report from the GAO, which found that lack of department oversight has led to student loan services no longer being monitored for call quality or accuracy from the GAO. [2:26:21] Without objection, so ordered. [2:26:22] Thank you, sir. [2:26:23] Thank you, Mr. Chair and Secretary McMahon. [2:26:27] It's been almost a year since you were last before our committee. [2:26:32] At that time, you could not tell me if you considered lesson plans on the Tulsa race massacre or a book by Ruby Bridges to be a so-called illegal DEI. [2:26:41] I'd like to very quickly revisit that because you did say that you would look into those topics. [2:26:46] Have you done so? [2:26:47] Yes, I have. [2:26:48] Could you please tell us what you have gleaned from that? [2:26:52] You know, particular programs on their face are not the issue. [2:26:58] It is how those programs are treated. [2:27:00] And so if we were looking at both of those incidents, you know, that you raised. [2:27:05] Yes, ma'am. [2:27:06] And you would just ask me, were these things that should or should not be taught? [2:27:10] I would say they should be taught. [2:27:11] Thank you. [2:27:12] They should be taught truthfully in their entirety. [2:27:13] Thank you. [2:27:14] Thank you so much. [2:27:15] I appreciate that. [2:27:16] So has that knowledge changed your outlook or your approach on education policy? [2:27:19] I believe that I think history should be taught and should be taught accurately and truthfully. [2:27:26] Yes, ma'am. [2:27:27] I thank you for that. [2:27:28] You of all people should have a stake in learning about segregation and educational inequity in [2:27:34] this country. [2:27:35] And I appreciate you taking that brief time because you are leading the federal agency that [2:27:39] was created to help right these historic and systemic injustices. [2:27:42] I do, however, have a concern because this administration has still made it abundantly clear that it is more [2:27:48] interested in reviving these injustices and restoring them to the status quo. [2:27:52] As part of your crusade to illegally dismantle the Department of Education, your fiscal year [2:27:57] 27 budget proposal consolidates 17 programs into a single reduced block grant. [2:28:02] States will be left to decide which students' needs they're going to meet. [2:28:07] And they'll have $4.6 billion fewer to meet those needs. [2:28:11] Pennsylvania stands to lose about $265 million with your budget, including $39 million due to the [2:28:17] consolidated block grants. [2:28:18] My district will lose $13 million, including about $2 million from the block grant. [2:28:23] My concern is that you're here celebrating this, that our country will be meeting fewer [2:28:30] children's needs. [2:28:31] This block grant consolidates programs that support children experiencing homelessness, [2:28:35] students, and are returning from carceral facilities or programs that promote school [2:28:40] desegregation. [2:28:41] Your agency is counting on the fact that states won't administer programs for all of these students [2:28:46] because they'll no longer have the financial incentive or financial means to do so. [2:28:50] We already know what happens when we leave desegregation up to the states. [2:28:55] This block grant proposal is as much about state rights as desegregation and segregation was. [2:29:00] After Brown v. Board, many states only stopped resisting desegregation when Congress passed the [2:29:06] Civil Rights Act of 64 and then the Elementary and Secretary Education Acts of 65. [2:29:11] We needed federal education policies and programs because those states could not be trusted to not be racist. [2:29:18] And this isn't a relic of the past. [2:29:21] School segregation is still rampant. [2:29:23] And as we speak, states are jumping at the restored opportunity to disenfranchise millions of black voters in southern states. [2:29:30] Secretary McMahon, how do you think we are going to move forward as a nation if we leave the education of black children, [2:29:37] for instance, solely up to states that are currently disenfranchising them or inequitably funding their schools? [2:29:45] Well, thank you very much for your comments. [2:29:47] And I can certainly appreciate your passion for what you were talking about. [2:29:51] The Department of Education is a pass-through of funding. [2:29:56] We don't control curriculum in the state. [2:29:58] Certainly. [2:29:59] But you do control the enforcement mechanisms such as the Office of Civil Rights, [2:30:04] where we have seen very little enforcement there. [2:30:07] You control staffing, which then trickle down, of course, the policies. [2:30:11] But also those larger funding streams that make it or don't make it to states dictate whether a state is able to implement programs that help or protect students based on disability or race or religion, etc. [2:30:24] Well, if we're talking about disabilities, that comes through IDEA. [2:30:27] Those are in federal law. [2:30:28] Yes. [2:30:29] And those programs will continue to be funded through those. [2:30:32] Certainly. [2:30:33] But I did ask specifically about black children. [2:30:34] About black children. [2:30:35] All children should be treated equally. [2:30:36] Absolutely. [2:30:37] But they're not. [2:30:39] Well, they should be. [2:30:40] But they aren't. [2:30:42] Well, governors in states and superintendents need to look at the laws in their particular states that are relative to their states. [2:30:50] What do you believe is the federal role in ensuring that states are not able to, whether it be discriminate or disproportionately punish students based on race or disability, [2:31:01] or implement programs that were previously funded by the federal level and no longer will be because of the consolidated block grants? [2:31:09] Well, I'm not sure your framing is correct. [2:31:11] Yes. [2:31:12] The reasoning for the consolidated block grants is so that governors and state superintendents of schools can look at where money needs to be spent in their states. [2:31:20] So that they can utilize that money in the best way. [2:31:23] But as I demonstrated with Pennsylvania, the state, our, my commonwealth will have fewer dollars to implement any programs. [2:31:29] Well, we, there is less funding. [2:31:32] However, there will also be less regulation. [2:31:33] Yes. [2:31:34] And that regulation was needed to protect students. [2:31:36] You won't have to hire as many people to grant programs. [2:31:38] Particularly children with disabilities from voucher programs that prioritize schools that aren't accountable to IDEA. [2:31:43] It has protected immigrant students from states that overturned their legal right to a public education. [2:31:47] It has protected Muslim and Jewish students in states where they would otherwise require that public schools display a Protestant version of the Ten Commandments and so on. [2:31:54] It is important that we have federal programs, federal oversight, and federal regulations to ensure that states are implementing appropriate education. [2:32:02] The gentlelady's time has expired. [2:32:03] Thank you. [2:32:04] I yield back. [2:32:05] Just, but just one comment. [2:32:06] We are not changing civil rights law. [2:32:07] That will continue to stay in place and exist. [2:32:10] I now recognize the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Under. [2:32:15] Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:32:18] And Secretary McMahon, thank you for coming before the committee today. [2:32:22] I had remarks on other, on other subjects, but I just can't help but to, to comment briefly on my colleague's comment that today's schools are, are, quote, segregated. [2:32:33] And, you know, I would, I would, I would tend to agree with that. [2:32:36] I would agree with that because just as Democrats were responsible for segregation a couple of generations ago, Democrats, not Republicans, Democrats opposed civil rights legislation, not Republicans. [2:32:52] Democrats, for that matter, opposed anti-lynching laws, not Republicans. [2:32:56] Today, Democrats and their teacher union allies are opposed to giving poor children and, yes, [2:33:04] poor black children, poor Hispanic children, opportunity to achieve a, a good education. [2:33:12] So Democrats and their teacher union allies oppose education savings account, charter schools, [2:33:18] open enrollment. [2:33:19] They even, they, even when they're in a, in an appropriate political climate, even oppose homeschooling. [2:33:24] So, it's really rich to hear a Democrat somehow, somehow accuse you and me, my colleagues, of somehow being responsible for the, [2:33:35] yes, the segregation today of poor minority children into failing schools when they insist on maintaining the public school monopoly that has generated that failure. [2:33:48] But, but, but Secretary, I'd like to commend your work along those lines of holding radical teacher unions accountable. [2:33:57] You recently reminded teachers across the country that the 2018 Supreme Court of Janice v. [2:34:02] Ask me made clear that teachers are not required to join or pay a union as condition, a condition of employment. [2:34:08] Many teachers disagree with the far, far left political activism. [2:34:13] And I would say the anti-choice activism of the National Education Association and the AFT. [2:34:20] And, you know, and those teachers many times find it appalling that 99.9% of AFT's political contributions are to Democrats. [2:34:30] The, less than 10% of the NEA's $400 million budget goes toward representing members and the bulk is spent on ideology and lobbying and executive perks. [2:34:42] So, they are taking teachers' hard-earned money and using it to support left-wing ideology and Democrat candidates and not teaching reading and writing and math. [2:34:52] So, I really do appreciate the focus of your, of your, of your admin, this administration and your leadership on teaching, teaching, teaching kids what they really need to know. [2:35:05] I'd likewise like to, to commend you on the enforcing the, the Trump administration's 2020 Title IX rule. [2:35:15] Our kids are becoming safer. [2:35:17] The Biden administration's attempt to rewrite Title IX to include gender identity did not strengthen civil rights. [2:35:24] In fact, it undermined the very sex-based protections for girls and for young women that Title IX was intended to, tended to, to promote. [2:35:34] But on a, on a, on a, on a completely different topic, I'd like to ask you a question. [2:35:39] For medical, medical, many medical students are obtaining student loans in the private, private market. [2:35:46] Federal, federal, federal loans don't always make up the entire cost of their education. [2:35:52] I, I think it's important that they have guidance to help them know which private lenders are trustworthy. [2:36:00] Um, does the department have a plan to work with the treasury department to, uh, develop and publish lists of trusted private lenders, uh, to help students select the right private lenders for their needs? [2:36:11] You know, those kinds of lists are already, you know, being produced and, uh, so, uh, continue to be looked at. [2:36:18] Okay. [2:36:19] Wonderful. [2:36:20] Yeah, maybe your staff could point us in that, in that direction because I've had a number of, um, groups representing, especially primary care physicians, [2:36:27] because, you know, it's no secret, of course, that medical education between undergrad and college and then expenses during residency can be very expensive. [2:36:35] And, uh, primary care doctors are, you know, are many times are at the low end of that physician salary, uh, range. [2:36:42] So, they're very interested in these issues. [2:36:45] Um, you know, given, um, the, um, the, uh, I, oh, and, and I'm running out of time. [2:36:53] So, I probably don't have time for this, but I'm gonna mention this. [2:36:56] Given your role as a former SBA administrator, um, I think there could be a role for the SBA [2:37:01] to play in helping medical trainees transition to private practice, to small, uh, businesses known as medical practices. [2:37:09] Because I really think that independent private practices many times are the lowest cost and the best place for patients to receive care. [2:37:16] So, I just wanted to make that comment. [2:37:20] Thank you. [2:37:21] Thank you. [2:37:23] The gentleman yields back. [2:37:24] I now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. DeSaulnier. [2:37:29] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:37:30] Um, Madam Secretary, thank you for being here and thank you for the, taking the time for our phone conversation. [2:37:36] I appreciate it very much. [2:37:38] Um, as I told you then, I have been very involved with special education for a long time at the local, state, and federal level. [2:37:46] Um, you expressed your engagement with that community the last time you were here. [2:37:51] Um, I didn't find your answers very satisfactory, so I was encouraged by the conversation yesterday. [2:37:58] Um, one of the things I'm concerned about, and one of the things I've heard when I'm out in the local community, which is regularly, including last week, is, um, IDEA, we just celebrated the 50th anniversary of President Gerald Ford signing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and all the accomplishments. [2:38:18] And one of the accomplishments, one thing we have failed at, as you pointed out in the conversation, is never fully funding it. [2:38:24] So the idea of, um, block granting a lot of those funds, including, um, Congressman Thompson is not paying attention, so I'll save it. [2:38:33] Uh, family engagement centers, which GT and I have been very involved with, uh, on a collaborative basis. [2:38:40] And the analysis that that works, that we know that family engagement works, particularly in this community, where it's such a tight-knit community. [2:38:48] That families, um, their empathy for their children and the siblings all benefits the community in, um, ways that, uh, financial analysis always really doesn't capture. [2:39:00] So, I'm concerned, Madam Secretary, that your approach, with all due respect, might be the Elon Musk approach to efficiency. [2:39:09] Um, that it's not really being reflected, and I'm afraid it won't be analyzed, and the damage issue may cause. [2:39:17] Does that mean I'm against some of your suggestions? As I told you on the phone, no. [2:39:21] Um, but there's a risk in not being thoughtful about these structures we've set up that actually work, and have been vetted, and have amazing return on investment. [2:39:32] So, consistent with, uh, our conversation, how are we going to make sure that this committee, in particular, that has so much jurisdiction appropriately, [2:39:41] and the Department of Education, over something that has historically been very bipartisan, remind you, again, Gerald Ford signed that. [2:39:49] Um, how do we make sure that it works for the clients? [2:39:53] That just, um, the business model of, well, if we just eliminate these, uh, somehow it will create efficiencies. [2:40:02] That may be true, but how are we making sure that that is true, and is not just our opinions, as was the case with Mr. Musk, [2:40:09] where there wasn't enough thoughtful review about eliminating positions that actually were quite effective, [2:40:15] and there's a cost associated with going back in, and in the context of a very vulnerable community, the special education community. [2:40:23] Could you respond to that? [2:40:25] Surely. [2:40:26] And thank you very much, and, uh, I'm glad that, uh, you're more satisfied with my answers as a result of our conversation, [2:40:33] and I want to just reemphasize with you today, uh, my absolute concern for our students with disabilities. [2:40:42] And as I, as I mentioned, I have traveled across the country. [2:40:46] I have visited classes for special education. [2:40:49] I have met with stakeholder groups. [2:40:51] I have sat with parents. [2:40:53] You know, I've gone into the schools and watched special ed teachers. [2:40:57] There was one child in a wheelchair that totally could not move anything except his eyes. [2:41:04] He was learning to read and communicate just through his retina. [2:41:09] And that special education teacher had to hold an iPad at an absolute angle for this child to be able to accomplish that. [2:41:17] And I felt, my goodness, those are the people that we absolutely must, uh, make sure that we are supporting. [2:41:24] And so to that end, I'm, I'm very pleased that in our proposed budget, we are proposing the largest amount of funding increase for IDEA. [2:41:35] And I appreciate that. [2:41:36] In history, about 590, uh, you know, billion dollars, uh, and 509 million, I'm sorry, 500 million additional dollars, you know, into that budget. [2:41:47] And, uh, and I, I think that that's going to be well spent. [2:41:50] And I, I'm very pleased that we have the, you know, the opportunities to do that. [2:41:54] Madam Secretary, I really don't, I don't want to interrupt, but I've got 35 seconds. [2:41:58] So I just want to follow up in that time. [2:42:00] And I respectfully, um, I, I want to make sure, you know, as in the conversation, I say this, and I look at my colleague, Glenn Thompson specifically about family engagement centers, [2:42:11] that we are going to be watching, that we make sure that you are thoughtful, and we make sure that the community gets the value of the investment. [2:42:21] And if you can work with us to make sure that there is proper oversight and analysis of what you're proposing to do. [2:42:27] So we don't have the doge situation where we have to go back and you've done irreparable damage because we're not being thoughtful. [2:42:35] So I just want to close with that. [2:42:36] Mr. Chairman, I hope you will join us with this, is that we want to protect this vulnerable population and not jump to conclusions where we have to go back and put more money back into it. [2:42:46] And in six months from now, after the turn of the year, I promise you, I will be very forceful if we have the gavel in holding you accountable. [2:42:55] And I hope it's a positive experience. [2:42:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:42:58] I thank the gentleman. [2:42:59] And I recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Fine. [2:43:04] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:43:06] I'd like to start by saying I am grateful every day that you are the Secretary of Education. [2:43:11] I hope you're the last Secretary of Education, but not because I don't think you're doing a great job, but because I hope that we fully return this issue to the states. [2:43:19] And I think it'd be a great way to go out if you're the Secretary of Education that helps make that happen. [2:43:24] And I'm incredibly grateful for all of the work that you've done, the extraordinary work, particularly relating to protecting Jewish students, given the disaster we saw from the Biden administration and protecting Jewish kids. [2:43:36] But I do have a concern, and I shared it with you on Monday, and I do want to share it here as well. [2:43:43] Because, look, even we all make mistakes along the way. [2:43:47] And I have real concerns. [2:43:48] I used to be in charge of health care in Florida, and we have a real shortage in our health care system of particular workers. [2:43:56] And I want to try to illustrate an example that might issue some of the issues we have with our graduate student loan limits, which I think are great. [2:44:05] I think we should be trying to bring down the cost of education, and that's absolutely true. [2:44:08] But I want to ask sort of a series of questions. [2:44:11] Do we think, do you, I don't think that we have a shortage of attorneys in the world. [2:44:16] I think we have too many. [2:44:17] Sorry to those of you who are lawyers. [2:44:18] But I do think we have a shortage of people who work in the health care field. [2:44:23] Is that something that you generally agree with me on? [2:44:26] Yeah, some of the stats have clearly indicated that. [2:44:30] So I want to focus on one thing. [2:44:31] So in the rules that we've put out as a result of legislation, and this was a decision of the department, [2:44:38] we've said that doctors, people, I'm sorry, lawyers, people who are going to become lawyers can borrow up to $200,000 to get their law degree at $50,000 a year. [2:44:47] But a different group, which I'm going to focus on just as one example, CRNA, these are certified registered nurse anesthetists. [2:44:55] For those of us who don't do this every day, this may be the person who's actually putting you under anesthesia, [2:45:01] because a lot of times there's a doctor that's not there. [2:45:04] Those folks getting their graduate degrees, they're not considered professional for some reason. [2:45:10] They're considered graduate programs. [2:45:12] The most that they can get is $100,000 in debt. [2:45:15] And even worse than that, whereas in the professional program the limits are 25%, $50,000 to $200,000, [2:45:24] they're actually 40% in the graduate programs, $20,000 versus $100,000. [2:45:30] Nurse anesthetists make more money than the average attorney. [2:45:38] A lot of lawyers aren't making bazillions of dollars. [2:45:40] Think of all the woke ones that work for a lot of the organizations that really do a lot to damage the country. [2:45:46] But nurse anesthetists generally actually make a fairly simple band, [2:45:50] because there's not lots of things you can do if you're a registered nurse anesthetist other than do that. [2:45:54] They make $212,000 a year versus an attorney that makes on average $150,000. [2:45:59] So does it make sense for us to take a field where we have real shortages [2:46:06] and create a situation where we may not be able to create the ones that we need [2:46:11] when we already don't have enough versus attorneys where I would argue we already have too many? [2:46:18] Well, thank you. [2:46:20] And I know we had a pretty long conversation about this a couple of days ago. [2:46:24] Relative to these programs, it is our overall goal to bring down the cost of college and education. [2:46:31] And I do think that relative to the shortages that we're having, [2:46:34] if we can bring down the cost for nurses in schools, [2:46:37] we can get more students to apply for those professions as well. [2:46:42] I would certainly hope we'd like to see that. [2:46:44] I think nurse anesthetists, that's a hard word for me to say. [2:46:47] It's a hard word. I didn't pick that one on purpose because it was hard. [2:46:50] But yes, there are more shortages in that field than there are. [2:46:55] But, however, where we see the greatest shortage is in our RNs, [2:47:01] in those nurses that are serving, you know, bedside, you know, in hospitals, etc. [2:47:06] And I agree. [2:47:07] And I don't want to cut you off, and I apologize. [2:47:09] And I think that's part of my concern here. [2:47:11] A registered nurse – we've sort of taken all nurses and we've sort of lumped them all together. [2:47:16] And a registered nurse is super important as well. [2:47:19] But $100,000 for a registered nurse is probably not the same as $100,000 for the person [2:47:26] who makes sure you don't die when you go under surgery. [2:47:30] And I only have 30 seconds left, but I guess my question is, [2:47:33] are you willing to work together to try to make sure that maybe we give a little bit less to the lawyers [2:47:39] that I think we have too many of, and we make sure in these critical medical fields [2:47:44] where I believe this is going to do real damage, we can try to make sure we get the staff people that we need? [2:47:50] Well, you know, that rule is final at this particular point of those professions that we are talking about. [2:47:56] But we are going – I certainly think that anesthetists who have the ability to make more income – [2:48:04] and I'm not looking to drive people into a private market, but those anesthetists and those programs have the ability to access more funds for their programs as well. [2:48:15] And they are incredibly important. All of them are important. [2:48:18] I want to make sure we have enough nurses and staffing. [2:48:21] I want to make sure that we can – you know, for our, you know, physician's assistants and nurse practitioners, [2:48:27] that those programs really are going to come in under these levels that we've set on the majority of the cases. [2:48:35] The gentleman's time has expired. [2:48:37] And now I recognize the gentlelady from Arizona, Ms. Grijalva. [2:48:41] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to enter into the record two reports, [2:48:45] one from Brookings and one from the UCLA Civil Rights Project that explain how charter schools, [2:48:50] which the department has lauded as part of a school choice spectrum, are perpetuating school segregation. [2:48:55] Without objection, hearing none, it's so ordered. [2:49:00] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Secretary McMahon, for appearing before us today to discuss the department's fiscal year 2027 budget request. [2:49:10] I'm the proud product of public schools, as are my parents, as are my children. [2:49:15] I served 20 years on our local school board. [2:49:17] And so I understand the impact and the life-changing opportunity that public school provides many in our community, [2:49:26] including the 50 million that are in public K-12 systems right now, in K-12 schools. [2:49:33] So as I look through your department's budget proposal, one thing is abundantly clear to me. [2:49:39] Your budget cuts are deep with programs that help many students who need the supports to have fair opportunity to a great education. [2:49:48] This request proposes a $3.2 billion reduction in discretionary budget authority representing a 4.1% cut that targets the most vulnerable learners. [2:49:59] I want to frame our discussion today around a central theme, access versus division. [2:50:04] To illustrate this, I brought the visual behind me, this graphic many of us recognize that distinguishes between equality and equity. [2:50:13] On the left, we see equity. Everyone is given the same single box to stand on. [2:50:18] But because students start at different heights, with different needs, that one box isn't enough for the smallest child to see the game. [2:50:25] On the right, we see equity. This is the goal, providing the specific supports necessary so that every child, regardless of their starting point, has a clear view of the field. [2:50:34] In this image, the boxes that the children stand on represent federal programs that provide a bridge to opportunity. [2:50:40] They are the tools we use to fulfill our responsibility to provide all students with free and appropriate public education. [2:50:47] However, your budget doesn't just fail to provide enough boxes, it actively kicks them away. [2:50:53] Secretary McMahon, in this version of the drawing, the boxes being pulled out from under our students have names. [2:50:58] TRIO and GEAR UP, you have proposed a total elimination of these college access and success programs, which are the primary federal supports for disadvantaged children and students striving for a degree. [2:51:11] Title IIIA, you're dissolving the Office of English Language Acquisition and targeting the very grants that support English learners, students who have already faced significant barriers to access. [2:51:23] And consolidated K-12 programs, you're folding 17 critical programs into a $2 billion block grant, creating a $4.6 billion shortfall that will leave local districts to fight over scraps. [2:51:36] By eliminating these programs, you aren't returning authority to the states. [2:51:40] You are abandoning the federal government's role as a guarantor of civil rights and equal opportunity. [2:51:46] You're choosing the path of division where only students who have already have the height can see the game, while the rest of us are left behind the fence that they can no longer climb. [2:51:59] I look forward to hearing how you can justify a budget that removes the very foundations of equity for students who need them most. [2:52:06] Your testimony speaks of empowerment while your budget speaks of elimination. [2:52:10] And to ensure this committee and the American people understand the true impact of these choices, I have a series of straightforward questions for the record. [2:52:18] A simple yes or no will suffice for each. [2:52:21] Do you acknowledge that these transfers and elimination of programs effectively hollow out the Department of Education without an act of Congress? [2:52:32] Definitely not. [2:52:33] Okay. [2:52:34] I disagree, but educators across the country report rising fear among students in communities affected by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE activity, with many students skipping school to avoid potential encounters. [2:52:48] Will you commit to supporting the reinstatement of DHS-sensitive locations guidance that was in place during the first Trump administration? [2:52:55] Yes or no? [2:52:56] That's handled by the Department of Homeland Security. [2:53:01] But the Education Department supported that. [2:53:04] Would you support instituting that again, that Trump One had in place? [2:53:09] Do you know what? [2:53:10] I would like to review that and get back to you. [2:53:12] Great. [2:53:13] I am concerned about the TRIO Talent Search and TRIO Educational Opportunity Center grant applications released by the Department of Education. [2:53:20] And I want to know if you, as the Secretary of Education, are going to rescind those unacceptable RFPs, rewrite them, and comply with the TRIO mission to reissue them. [2:53:30] You know, one of the things that we are doing relative to TRIO is we're going to spend about $2.1 million researching TRIO programs and their effectiveness and to see how they might be restructured to be more effective. [2:53:44] I think that the programs are incredibly successful already and using $2.1 million would be better used in the programs to actually support children's education. [2:53:53] We do actually have two competitions going on now with the TRIO programs. [2:53:57] Okay. [2:53:58] And Secretary McMahon, does eliminating English language acquisition program and dissolving the Office of English Language Acquisition help children learn English? [2:54:06] One of the things that we found out with our research and through the NAEP scores as well, is that these programs are not performing well. [2:54:16] That students who have these programs are not actually learning better or faster through these programs, you know, with English language learning. [2:54:25] And so those are being now spread out through all of different departments, you know, for education. [2:54:32] And so children that are immersed and working, you know, every day with students who speak English have about just about the same proficiency as those who are involved in the other programs. [2:54:42] Yeah. [2:54:43] On a general basis for our research. [2:54:44] The gentlelady's time has expired. [2:54:45] I think I appreciate that. [2:54:46] I yield back. [2:54:47] I now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Harris. [2:54:50] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:54:53] Madam Secretary, I enjoyed our conversation ahead of this hearing and appreciate you being here today and for your perseverance. [2:55:01] Yeah, right here, right front and center. [2:55:04] I've received reports from the concerned parents in North Carolina's 8th District that I have the pleasure of serving in, [2:55:12] but biological males are entering girls' bathrooms at Mount Pleasant and Cox Mill High Schools there in Cabarrus County. [2:55:20] And these incidents have made female students feel unsafe and uncomfortable and have left a lot of parents appropriately concerned about their daughters [2:55:28] and how this issue is being addressed by the school district and the Department of Education. [2:55:34] I strongly believe, as we talked about the other day, that parents, as you do, not the federal government, [2:55:39] should guide their children on matters of identity and faith. [2:55:43] For years, the federal government pushed gender ideology into our schools, often over the objection of parents and communities. [2:55:51] And we all know that President Trump's executive order, which was titled, [2:55:54] Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, [2:56:00] was a Necessary and Welcomed Correction. [2:56:03] So I want to just ask you, what is the Department doing to ensure that schools are fully complying with this executive order? [2:56:12] And what consequences are schools going to face if they continue to use federal dollars to promote gender ideology in defiance of the president's order? [2:56:23] Well, thank you very much, Congressman Harris, for your comments. [2:56:28] You know, given the example that you've just, you know, talked about, that there are parents in your district who have said that there are now boys in the girls' bathrooms. [2:56:43] And I think you told me over the phone that they're even sometimes taking videos where they're in the bathrooms. [2:56:50] I just wonder if those who are sitting here today and parents, you know, around are listening to this and going, have we lost all common sense? [2:57:00] I mean, this is just simply to me a matter of common sense. [2:57:07] However, given that, we do have Title IX in place. [2:57:12] And if there are these instances where there are Title IX violations, they should then be reported to our Office of Civil Rights so that we could investigate them. [2:57:22] Thank you. And so just in short, when parents are made aware of incidents like the ones occurring at Mount Pleasant and Cox Mill High School, what is their best route? [2:57:32] Would you tell them what should they do to correct that issue and even bring it to the department's attention? [2:57:38] Because obviously they've looked to me as their congressman to say, hey, and we've talked about this at the school board level. [2:57:44] And when the school board is not responding, what can we do to make sure there is enforcement of the president's executive order here? [2:57:52] Well, certainly I do think that the best approach is to report it to the Office of Civil Rights. [2:57:58] We do the investigating and then, you know, if we find them to be in fault, then there are other measures that can be taken. [2:58:06] And so that I think is the best way to proceed. [2:58:10] Great. I do want to follow up on your efforts in the Office of Civil Rights. [2:58:16] You shared the massive backlog left by the previous administration. [2:58:20] I think the number I heard earlier today was 19,000. [2:58:23] And I think that's a very important context. [2:58:26] I mean, under the previous administration, OCR's efficiency was steadily declining. [2:58:31] But no one here was running to Secretary Cardona at that point. [2:58:36] So I want to offer you the opportunity to share what you are doing now today to address the backlog [2:58:42] and what your resolution numbers look like this year. [2:58:46] I know my colleague claimed that your reported numbers were simply dismissals, but that's not the case, correct? [2:58:52] No, it's about 4,000 resolutions. [2:58:55] We've had just in the last quarter. [2:58:58] So I'm very happy to report that Assistant Secretary Kim Ritchie, who was in charge of this program under the first Trump administration [2:59:07] and had such great success, is now in place over the past, you know, a few months at the Department of Education. [2:59:15] She has fully taken control of this. [2:59:18] She has been responsible for this resolution of these 4,000 cases, which I'm very pleased to report. [2:59:25] And is using all the tools available now to continue to reduce this backlog. [2:59:30] Thank you. [2:59:32] One final thing. [2:59:33] Since he's been in office, President Trump's been working to implement bold and targeted reforms in higher education through several executive orders. [2:59:40] And one in particular was the White House initiative to promote excellence and innovation at historically black colleges and universities. [2:59:49] And that was a new initiative within the executive office of the President to enhance that support. [2:59:54] In my district, Barbara Scotia College, which was founded in 1867, has a long history of educating North Carolinians. [3:00:01] From being originally established as a college to train African American women to go into the fields of education and social work to amending their charter to become a co-ed institution in the 1950s, it's been a staple in our community. [3:00:15] And I want to thank you for working with me and Barbara Scotia College to address some of the concerns and needs of the school. [3:00:21] But could you just take a moment and talk about any of the administration? [3:00:24] The gentleman's time has expired. [3:00:26] My time has expired. [3:00:27] Time has expired. [3:00:28] Sorry. [3:00:29] I'll give you a chance later on. [3:00:30] Thank you. [3:00:31] I'll get with you and I'll let you know about that. [3:00:33] Thank you. [3:00:34] Thank you. [3:00:35] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:00:36] Madam Secretary, sorry to belabor this. [3:00:37] I know so many people on both sides of the aisle have asked you about the Department's decision to remove nursing, teaching, social work, and other critical occupations from the definition of professional degrees and capping their ability to receive federal loans. [3:01:05] I know that in my home state of Minnesota, we're expecting to face a shortage of 30,000 nurses in the next four years. [3:01:16] And I know that your home state of North Carolina, it is expected to see a shortage of 13,000. [3:01:24] Our nurses obviously are limited in their capacity. [3:01:29] They're overworked and they're worried. [3:01:31] So I know you said the decision is final, but I'm just trying to figure out if you can answer why did you move forward with an action that you know is going to be creating a problem or worsening a problem that already exists? [3:01:46] Well, first of all, let me correct one thing. [3:01:49] We did not remove any of these professions from a professional category. [3:01:55] They were never characterized in the law, in the statute, as a professional category. [3:02:02] So as these caps were put into place, and many professions were then being reviewed as to what constituted a professional category guided by the definition of a professional degree from Congress. [3:02:17] So that was the overview that we looked at as we are writing this new rulemaking with the overall goal of putting caps in place that are going to reduce the cost of college. [3:02:31] How is that happening? [3:02:34] Well, I have a couple of articles here already that there are colleges. [3:02:38] What do they say? [3:02:39] They are saying that they are looking at reducing the cost of their graduate programs. [3:02:44] I know, but looking is not addressing the problem that we are currently seeing. [3:02:48] What I am asking you is that you've made a decision that is currently making the problem worse. [3:02:56] That is not correct. [3:02:57] Let me push back on that. [3:02:59] Are you saying the numbers in Minnesota that we're seeing or in North Carolina are not real? [3:03:03] What I'm saying to you is there are shortages in those states, primarily in the undergraduate nursing program, which is not affected by this new rule and this new cap. [3:03:13] Undergraduate programs are not affected at all. [3:03:16] I know, but can you- [3:03:17] These are only graduate programs, so the shortage is not a result of this cap being put on. [3:03:22] The shortage of nursing is that we don't have enough applicants into the nursing programs that are coming through our universities. [3:03:32] So instead of helping with the problem, you've decided to make it worse? [3:03:36] No, I don't think you ran when I talked about another way to get to an RN, an expedited program. [3:03:41] You can get a two-year certificate and then take the exam to become an RN. [3:03:45] You know, my sisters are nurses. [3:03:46] I do know how those things work. [3:03:48] I'm asking you about the specific classification that you created that lowers the cap. [3:03:53] We didn't remove that from a professional designation. [3:03:58] I know, but address the cap issue when it comes to the- [3:04:03] I just did because I said it does not impact the undergraduate program. [3:04:06] But you said you were trying to lower the cost of tuition. [3:04:09] Absolutely. [3:04:10] How does that happen? [3:04:11] Because there are already colleges that are lowering the cost of their graduate programs because- [3:04:16] Wait, what are those colleges? [3:04:18] There's a college in California, University of California in Irvine, and Purdue University in Indiana. [3:04:25] And is it for business or for nursing? [3:04:28] They have lowered them right now in for their business programs. [3:04:31] But we're talking about nursing, ma'am. [3:04:32] Well, I hope that they'll look at other programs to reduce the cost. [3:04:35] Because business is not something that you had an impact on. [3:04:38] I don't have control over which programs they're doing, but if they have fewer applicants coming into their universities [3:04:45] and they realize part of the reason is because their cost is too high, they will lower those costs. [3:04:53] I don't think that is how it works. [3:04:55] That is exactly how it works. [3:04:57] That is not how it works. [3:04:58] It is supply and demand. [3:04:59] Your specific job is to try to make sure, as the head of the Department of Education, to make education accessible for Americans. [3:05:11] When you create policies that make education unreachable for Americans that want that education, then you are failing at your job. [3:05:21] No, when there have not been caps on programs and universities have been allowed to charge whatever they wanted and the student loan program allowed them to borrow up to whatever that university said was the cost, it was time to take action and to put caps in place that are going to start. [3:05:39] If your caps only create a funnel through the private borrowing system. [3:05:46] That's not true. [3:05:47] Yes, that is what it will do. [3:05:49] How else would somebody, if I wanted to get a professional degree and I'm capped and I can't borrow, then I have to, from a public source, then I have to go private. [3:06:00] And that is what your administration is really trying to do, is trying to help enrich others on the backs of the American people. [3:06:09] I yield back. [3:06:10] General Lady Yales, I now recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania, the father of the Farm Bill, Mr. Thompson. [3:06:19] That's a new title. [3:06:21] Well, thank you so much, Chairman. [3:06:23] And thank you, Secretary McMahon, for, it's just great to see you again. [3:06:26] Thank you. [3:06:27] Thank you for being here. [3:06:29] Thank you for putting up with the politics here as well. [3:06:32] First off, I want to put in a good word for the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency, or FEA. [3:06:39] I know that's one of the agencies that the Department of Education works with. [3:06:46] They provide affordable access to higher education through student financial aid services for students and families. [3:06:52] And widely recognized for their commitment in reducing financial barriers for families, not just in Pennsylvania, but other states across the nation. [3:06:59] Secretary, my first question is, the current Title I formula has a fundamental flaw. [3:07:06] It rewards district size over poverty concentration, something I've worked on for years. [3:07:13] Meaning that rural districts with the highest poverty rates often receive less per youth than larger, less impoverished districts. [3:07:24] It's basically just on, clearly just on size. [3:07:27] That's one of the fundamental flaws of that. [3:07:29] My bipartisan bill, all children are equal, or the ACE Act, fixes this by directing dollars to actual poverty concentration, not population. [3:07:38] Therefore, making it equal, recognizing that the assistance that you may require under Title I because of living in poverty shouldn't be dictated by your zip code. [3:07:52] So, Secretary, how would shifting to a poverty percentage-based formula better align with the original intent of Title I funding? [3:08:03] Well, you know, it's been a long-time critique of the Title I-A formula, and we're happy to continue to provide technical assistance and work with you to help work through that. [3:08:15] I appreciate that. [3:08:16] I think the Congressional Research Service and the Department of Education has been very helpful. [3:08:20] Sure. [3:08:21] This did pass as a part of the bill that repealed No Child Left Behind. [3:08:26] Unfortunately, when we got to the Senate and Conference Committee, they did what Congress does when it doesn't have the courage to do the right thing, they commissioned a study. [3:08:36] And studies completed, and I appreciate that, and the study showed exactly what we were proposing, the issues. [3:08:44] So, I appreciate your support, those reforms that prioritize actual concentration of poverty over district size and population. [3:08:52] My next question was on gainful employment, but Chairwoman Emeritus Fox covered that really well. [3:08:59] I appreciate your commitment to take a look at that. [3:09:03] We have certificate program graduates like cosmetologists who intentionally want to work part-time, you know, because they also want to have family responsibilities. [3:09:14] And a full-time equivalency formula, it just unfairly punishes them and punishes these programs. [3:09:22] And so, I appreciate your commitment you've already made on that. [3:09:25] The, let's see, my next question is really with TRIO. [3:09:34] I'm a big fan of TRIO as someone who is kind of a first-generation learner trying to navigate higher education. [3:09:42] You know, to provide clarity and reassurance for current grantees, can the department confirm the successful TRIO talent search and educational opportunity center applicants scoring high enough for continued funding should expect awards at or near the current levels? [3:09:59] Well, we have two programs in TRIO that we're right now competing. [3:10:04] And that is on the talent search level and the educational opportunity center. [3:10:08] So, they, they're being competed right now. [3:10:10] Great. And I heard that you're looking at them. [3:10:12] I encourage you to do that if you want to invite you up to Penn State anytime, or I have a number of TRIO programs throughout the one-third of the landmass of Pennsylvania I represent. [3:10:21] It's just my home county as center county. [3:10:24] We, we, we, we glad to visit with you those, those programs. [3:10:29] I, I was, I was proud to help secure a provision for workforce Pell and the Work Families Tax Cut Act to expand Pell grant eligibility to include short-term, high-quality, skills-based program for workers looking to climb the next rung on the ladder of opportunity. [3:10:46] What impacts does the department expect workforce Pell grants to have on closing workforce shortages in critical industries such as healthcare, which we've heard a lot about, manufacturing technology, or the skills trade, or skilled trades? [3:11:01] Well, the, the big advantage is the shorter term that it takes, you know, to get these certificates to get into the marketplace. [3:11:08] And you can also have stackable credentials, you know, under the workforce Pell program. [3:11:13] And so, I do believe that we're going to be able to put people into the workforce faster and help by reduce, you know, the, the shortage that we have through, you know, these shorter term programs. [3:11:25] And you're going to show up there with less debt. [3:11:27] Absolutely. [3:11:28] Which is a good thing. [3:11:29] That's one of the biggest factors too. [3:11:30] Yeah. [3:11:32] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:11:33] Appreciate it. [3:11:35] I thank the gentleman. [3:11:36] Now, I recognize the gentleman from Indiana. [3:11:38] Mr. Messner. [3:11:39] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:11:41] And thank you, thank you Secretary McMahon for joining us today. [3:11:44] First off, I want to echo the concerns from Representative Fein and several other members here today on the agencies, departments, overly restrictive use of the term profession. [3:11:55] Engineering engineers are not considered a profession. [3:11:58] And there's a lot of engineers that make a lot of money. [3:12:00] And, and these loan, student loan abilities should be tagged more toward earning income, earning, earning potential rather than a decades old use of profession. [3:12:10] So thank you for that. [3:12:11] And we've shared that before. [3:12:13] I want to start by highlighting the mega, mega block grant program in the President's budget. [3:12:21] As the budget puts it, this overhaul eliminates the department's ability to micromanage federal funds intended for local communities, improves efficiency, cuts red tape for school districts, and reduces the federal footprint. [3:12:34] Can you share with us how this mega grant structure gives states and local districts the flexibility they need to serve their students rather than having Washington tell them how to do it? [3:12:43] Well, you know, as I've toured the country and visited many states, talked to many governors already and state superintendents. [3:12:51] One of the things that they have talked about is they know best where to spend their money. [3:12:57] And if they had the opportunity, you know, to have money block granted in, then they wouldn't have to also hire grant writers. [3:13:06] They wouldn't have to hire more staff to supervise these grants coming in. [3:13:11] They could actually apply more of the money where it needed to be. [3:13:15] And so hearing that cry as well and wanting to have states operate more efficiently, we really wanted to provide governors with that opportunity, you know, what they had asked for. [3:13:26] And so I think that by putting these block grants into place, these mega grants, you know, the president said, and I absolutely agree with him, that the best education is that that's closest to the child. [3:13:41] So those governors and those state superintendents see where the needs are in their states. [3:13:46] They can take this money. [3:13:47] However, we are requiring that 50 percent of this money be divided 25 percent for literacy improvement, 25 percent for numeracy improvement, because we have clearly failed our students in those two categories. [3:14:02] Any cost estimates that anybody's put together on how much administrative burden school districts, you know, are stuck with and just compliance and regulatory reporting on the strings that always come with federal money? [3:14:17] Well, I can tell you one stat that I was given one time, and that was from the state of Tennessee. [3:14:23] And they had done a study and said that for every dollar that comes into the classroom in Tennessee, 47 cents were spent in regulatory compliance. [3:14:32] So it's one state, one example. [3:14:34] But I would I would bet and I've heard other stats, too, that always around 50 percent of every dollar that comes in is spent not in educating students, [3:14:44] not in providing the services they need, but in regulatory compliance. [3:14:48] Well, that's across the spectrum and pretty well anything government touches. [3:14:52] So thank you for that. [3:14:54] Federal law under the protection of pupil rights amendment guarantees parents of students in school districts that receive funds from the Department of Education, [3:15:01] the right to review the child's curriculum. [3:15:03] What obstacles are school districts using and throwing in front of parents seeking to exercise that right? [3:15:10] And what steps can the department take to break down those obstacles to ensure parental rights are insured? [3:15:15] That's one of the things that we're doing is we are we are looking at, you know, FERPA, which is what you're talking to, talking about. [3:15:22] And how are how are parents being denied access to, you know, their children's records? [3:15:30] It is incredible to me that that if a parent requested, you know, that they would be given the records of their child. [3:15:41] Or let me give you a specific example. [3:15:44] If a child is working with the school and just decided that they're having difficulties [3:15:49] and they think there might be transgendering or et cetera, and they want to be known other with by other pronouns, [3:15:56] and the school is having conversations with that child, those that school doesn't call the parent to talk about those. [3:16:03] Parents need to know. [3:16:04] This is a common sense thing. [3:16:05] You can't take an aspirin at a school without having a parent's, you know, permission. [3:16:09] But these are life changing things that are happening to these students and parents aren't involved in these decisions. [3:16:16] It's just it to me, it's just illogical. [3:16:22] Parents control their children. [3:16:24] They're not wards of the state. [3:16:25] They don't belong to the federal government or the state government. [3:16:28] They belong to their parents. [3:16:30] Thank you. [3:16:31] One quick follow up. [3:16:32] Representative Cole, Appropriations Chair, has a bill to investigate abuses at Indian boarding schools, [3:16:37] which the committee passed overwhelmingly two years ago. [3:16:40] Would you and your department agree that the Congress should be supportive of taking action [3:16:46] in teachers or administrators who act inappropriately? [3:16:52] Absolutely. [3:16:53] Regardless of what school. [3:16:55] Thank you. [3:16:56] I yield. [3:16:57] I thank the gentleman. [3:16:58] I recognize the gentlelady from New York, Ms. Stefanik. [3:17:00] Thank you, Chairman Walberg. [3:17:02] Secretary McMahon, great to see you here today. [3:17:04] Under your leadership, the department is actively investigating my alma mater, Harvard, over multiple civil rights issues, [3:17:10] including pervasive anti-Semitism on campus and continuation of illegal affirmative action policies. [3:17:17] I highlight this, not only the work that I've done on this committee, but also in my new book. [3:17:23] Can you give this committee an update on the progress of those investigations and the ongoing negotiations with Harvard? [3:17:29] Well, we certainly are continuing our conversations with Harvard. [3:17:36] But there are also, you know, a couple of, you know, litigations that are ongoing now, you know, with Harvard. [3:17:45] And I'd like to see Harvard take more of the Yale example of really doing the kind of research and doing the surveys [3:17:56] and understanding what is going on in their community and taking actions, you know, on their own. [3:18:02] I was delighted, though, this week to see the Harvard Crimson come out and verify a lot of the things that we've been talking about. [3:18:13] So the kids at Harvard, I'll just, if I may, just take one second and read this. [3:18:19] The purpose of university ought to be, this is Harvard Crimson, to be academic excellence, [3:18:24] explored through critical and open inquiry by an intellectually diverse body of students and faculty in the pursuit of veritas or truth. [3:18:32] Yet in recent years, we've strayed from that mission. [3:18:35] These are the kids at the Crimson who are calling their own university to task. [3:18:41] And there are other examples, you know, through this article that is absolutely saying the things that we've been talking about, [3:18:48] that universities ought to be for open debate. [3:18:51] They ought to teach, you know, what is, you know, both sides of the coin. [3:18:57] Harvard Crimson had also said earlier on that only 3% of the faculty was conservative. [3:19:03] Let's get to make sure that universities can be what they were designed to be, and that is in those institutions of truth-seeking. [3:19:12] Yes. [3:19:13] Thank you so much for referencing both the Yale report, but also that piece that ran in the Harvard Crimson. [3:19:19] That language and exact verbiage is very similar to the letter that your department has sent to Harvard, encouraging them to focus on academic excellence and the work that we've done on this committee. [3:19:31] Just touching back on the Yale report, which you referenced, some of their recommendations are very much related to the work that you've been pursuing in the department, [3:19:39] that we've been focused on in the committee, including supporting academic freedom, reorienting towards an educational mission instead of political indoctrination, [3:19:48] and making higher education really the goal for the students rather than what we've seen in some of the politicization on these campuses. [3:19:56] Can you add additional reflections on the importance of this report? [3:20:01] I mean, the follow-up I have is a report is one thing we need to see action in addition. [3:20:06] You know, I have really been encouraged by many of the university presidents that I've been talking to, [3:20:13] and even during the compact, the university compact that we proposed at the very beginning of the Trump administration. [3:20:21] And these are programs that are now more and more being adopted across campuses. [3:20:26] I've even met with President McInnis from Yale and sat with her and talked with her about the success of these programs, [3:20:33] or the success of the report and the implementation that they are already doing on campus. [3:20:39] And she's seeing, you know, such great response. [3:20:41] And so I would just encourage more and more of our universities to be looking again at what these, [3:20:50] at what they were set up and designed to do. [3:20:53] They have so much to offer. [3:20:56] But we really have strayed, as this student said, we have strayed from where our universities need to be. [3:21:04] From their founding mission. [3:21:05] Another area that you've been particularly forward-leaning and focused on is the literacy and reading crisis in the country. [3:21:12] We have seen that literacy has declined at all levels of schooling, [3:21:16] and the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress has reading scores among high school seniors at their lowest level since 1992. [3:21:25] And many college students now require remedial reading and writing courses. [3:21:30] Can you outline your focus on literacy and addressing this reading crisis? [3:21:34] And also there are states we can take lessons from that have increased their reading capabilities. [3:21:39] Well, and thank you for that. [3:21:41] The greatest improvement we have seen in literacy scores through the NAEP testing, [3:21:47] we're in those states like Mississippi and Louisiana and Florida who have adopted the science of reading [3:21:53] and really gotten back to that. [3:21:55] These are state initiatives. [3:21:57] They've originated at the state level. [3:21:59] And we are supporting that through the mega grant that is part of our new budget proposal, [3:22:06] that 25 percent of that would be set aside for literacy. [3:22:09] 25 percent of that would be set aside for numeracy, [3:22:12] because we have clearly failed our students in teaching them to read. [3:22:16] And if you cannot read, you are just not going to be successful. [3:22:20] Thank you. Yield back. [3:22:21] Thank you. [3:22:22] I thank the gentlelady and now recognize the gentlelady from Illinois, Ms. Miller. [3:22:26] Thank you, Secretary McMahon, for being here today and for your continued work in promoting student achievement [3:22:32] and preparing the next generation to be productive citizens. [3:22:36] We're very grateful. [3:22:38] Yet for too long, the Department of Education has failed in this basic mission. [3:22:44] The Department became bloated with career bureaucrats while our children were trapped in failing schools. [3:22:51] And in response to my Democrat colleague earlier, I want to say that the most racist thing going on in our country today is forcing inner city. [3:23:02] A lot of times they're black and brown children to have to stay in these failing schools. [3:23:07] And I just thank you for your efforts to give them options to get out. [3:23:11] Thankfully, Madam Secretary, you and President Trump are now at the helm, reversing decades of decline that only grew under the last administration. [3:23:20] After President Biden gutted women's rights, President Trump restored Title IX, reaffirming what we all know to be true. [3:23:28] Men should not be allowed in women's sports. [3:23:31] President Trump also stood up for parental rights by enforcing FERPA, ensuring parents are not excluded from what's happening in their child's classroom. [3:23:42] And lastly, I'd like to applaud your work, Madam Secretary, on expanding school choice. [3:23:47] Because of your efforts, more parents will have the opportunity to use their hard earned money to send their children to the best schools, [3:23:56] rather than force them to continue attending failing schools. [3:24:02] Madam Secretary, I'd like to ask you about the Education Freedom Tax Credit, a critical program that will help rescue children from failing schools. [3:24:12] Why do you think blue state governors like J.B. Pritzker refused to help their constituents by blocking school choice programs like these? [3:24:22] To my understanding, this program is open and states can sign up today. [3:24:26] Is that correct? [3:24:27] That's correct. [3:24:28] And I'm not quite sure why any governor would not want to opt into this program. [3:24:34] Because it's increasing the pool of money that is available for parents to have access to through private donations. [3:24:44] And these scholarship branding organizations, which are approved by governors in the states or their state board of education, [3:24:52] ever how they have it set up within their state. [3:24:54] But this money is money that is donated from private sources. [3:24:59] There's no cap on how much money can be donated. [3:25:02] That donor gets a $1,700 tax credit on their federal tax return. [3:25:08] We expect the pool of money to be built up through these private donations to exceed $3 to $4 billion. [3:25:16] Over time, this is a substantial amount of money that can go into those education programs. [3:25:23] You then have a parent that can apply to these scholarship branding organizations to either get a scholarship for their child to be taken out of a failing school, [3:25:33] or a school that is not serving the needs of that child to move into another school, public or private. [3:25:40] Or they can utilize those funds for after school tutoring, or if they have a child with disabilities to get more services for that child. [3:25:49] So I am not quite sure why a governor would not want to avail him or herself of the opportunity for students in their states to have this program come into their states. [3:26:03] I hear a lot of the excuses, well, I'm going to hold off, make sure there are no, like, hidden agendas or whatever. [3:26:10] It's not hidden agendas here. [3:26:12] These are very straightforward and available. [3:26:15] And I would hope that more of our governors, I think we have about, we have about 25, 26 governors that have already opted in. [3:26:23] And we have a Democratic governor who did opt in, and I hope to see many more, and the governor of New York has, [3:26:30] the implication was that she had opted in, she's opted in with caveats. [3:26:35] So I think she's trying to have a foot in both camps. [3:26:37] I'd like to see that full on support and adoption of the program. [3:26:42] Well, it's so good for the students, and we can only surmise why they would want, [3:26:46] or why they wouldn't want to sign up for this. [3:26:51] I do, we all know that people that are illiterate are easier to control. [3:26:56] Perhaps they are afraid they won't be able to continue the indoctrination of the children. [3:27:01] But we appreciate the focus that you have to offer excellent education to kids, [3:27:06] and to give them options to get out of failing schools. [3:27:10] Secretary McMahon, last year you put out guidance clarifying that FERPA prohibits school districts [3:27:16] from concealing gender transition information from parents. [3:27:19] You've also taken steps to investigate states and school districts that have refused to comply. [3:27:25] As you continue this great work, is there anything that you'd like to see Congress do to help with these efforts? [3:27:32] Well, I just want to make sure that we are, you know, that we are enforcing FERPA. [3:27:37] Because parents, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, children are not the wards of government. [3:27:43] They are, they belong to their parents. [3:27:46] And parents should have those rights relative to their children, [3:27:49] to opt them out of, you know, educational programs, [3:27:53] to opt them out of ideology programs. [3:27:56] That should be up to the parent. [3:27:58] Thank you. [3:28:00] The gentlelady, her time has expired. [3:28:02] I now recognize the gentlelady from Michigan, Ms. McLean. [3:28:06] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:28:09] And thank you, Secretary McMahon, for being here. [3:28:11] And more importantly, thank you for all the work that you've done in the education sector. [3:28:16] It is absolutely critical. [3:28:19] And if we truly want to change the trajectory of this country [3:28:23] and make sure that we leave the next generation better off than the ones that, the one that we have, [3:28:29] it comes with our education system. [3:28:31] So, I know you do a lot of tireless work and you don't get a lot of thank yous for it. [3:28:35] So, I'm here to say thank you. [3:28:37] Thank you. [3:28:38] The one area that I've gotten a lot of feedback on and concern about, [3:28:43] and you've been very gracious in talking with me about this, [3:28:46] is around the graduate programs and the cap funding programs. [3:28:51] So, right now, it's my understanding that we have a graduate nursing program shortage, right? [3:29:01] Physician's assistants, nurse anesthetists. [3:29:05] And in the working families tax cuts, one of the things we did was we put caps on, [3:29:10] but we had some carve-outs and caveats. [3:29:12] And it said included to, but not limited to. [3:29:17] And I think this sector of graduate nursing programs was just an unintended consequence perhaps that got overlooked. [3:29:27] And what I'm here to do is really advocate for these programs because I think they're extremely important. [3:29:33] Number one, we have a need for these nurses, right? [3:29:38] Everywhere I go in my district or even around the country and I talk to the healthcare systems, [3:29:42] my goodness, we have a shortage and we're actually importing, right? [3:29:47] People are coming in from outside the country to fill these positions because we don't have enough supply that are graduating here from America. [3:29:55] It seems to me that we have a good return on the investment. [3:30:00] The employment rate is anywhere from 96% to 98%, depending on what programs. [3:30:05] Some programs even have a 100% employment rate. [3:30:08] The repayment rate on these student loans are, you know, 96.8%. [3:30:15] So, it seems like it's a really good return on our investment, yet there's about a $15,000 to $18,000 gap. [3:30:23] And I'm wondering if there's any way or you had any thoughts on can we explore opening the nurse graduate programs up to expand these caps or lift these caps? [3:30:38] Because it's a good return on investment and we sure do need them. [3:30:42] Well, the rule is closed at the moment, but let me go back and just talk about a couple of the things that I've found as these issues have come up [3:30:51] and through all of the work that we went through during the rulemaking. [3:30:58] We had 80,000 comments coming about this because we responded to every single one of them. [3:31:03] So, clearly we were looking at this all across the board. [3:31:07] And all of the undergraduate programs, which is really where most of the shortage is. [3:31:13] That is what our research shows. [3:31:17] That's what I hear anecdotally as well, are nurses in hospitals. [3:31:21] Those programs aren't affected. [3:31:23] The caps don't apply for them at all. [3:31:26] And recent research that I looked at, and this was research that came out of HHS through one of our research divisions, [3:31:38] were showing that actually in the graduate programs, we're pretty much meeting the needs there. [3:31:45] Now, in the anesthetist world, there's a shortage there. [3:31:49] And that's a more expensive program, you know, for sure. [3:31:52] But in the nurse practitioners, overall throughout the country. [3:31:56] I know that there are sections of the country where we probably are experiencing that shortage. [3:32:01] But overall, we're pretty much meeting that need. [3:32:05] But I've been getting feedback quite heavily. [3:32:13] I'm trying to put it as politically correct as I possibly can, to the contrary. [3:32:18] From both the hospitals and the schools, they see their enrollment rates going down for the graduate nursing programs, right? [3:32:26] I'm not talking about the undergrads, but the graduate nursing programs. [3:32:29] So, I don't know if there's something we can do to bridge the gap. [3:32:33] And you know what our goal is? [3:32:36] I do. [3:32:37] The goal is to bring down the cost of universities and college in these programs. [3:32:41] Because they're just too high. [3:32:44] As I said, undergraduate programs are not affected. [3:32:47] And 78% of those who are going into the graduate programs, 78% are not applying or have programs that are under this cap. [3:32:58] So, there are places to go and get these degrees that cost less. [3:33:03] And I really do believe, as market competition is available, you will see universities and colleges bring down these costs. [3:33:10] Would you be willing to share those colleges with me so I could share them? [3:33:13] Sure. [3:33:14] Because there is definitely a gap, at least from the boots on the ground. [3:33:18] I'm out of time. [3:33:19] I appreciate your time. [3:33:20] Thank you. [3:33:21] Thank you very much. [3:33:22] I thank the gentlelady. [3:33:23] Now I recognize the ranking member, the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott. [3:33:29] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:33:34] Thank you, Madam Secretary, for being with us today. [3:33:42] You've heard a lot about this big ugly bill and the voucher program. [3:33:48] I've heard estimates that it may cost as much as $58 billion. [3:33:53] Do you disagree with that? [3:33:54] Sir, I would like to see where your numbers are coming from so I could evaluate them. [3:34:01] And what is your estimate? [3:34:04] I'd like to look at those numbers again. [3:34:06] I think that the overall, you know, what we are trying to do is… [3:34:09] The cost to a donor is up to $1,700 is zero. [3:34:14] They get their money back if they make a $1,700 donation. [3:34:17] Oh, you're talking about the… [3:34:20] No, no, no. [3:34:21] I'm sorry. [3:34:22] You're right. [3:34:23] Total cost, we don't know. [3:34:25] You said you don't know. [3:34:27] But the cost to a donor of $1,700 donation, they get their $1,700 back in a tax credit. [3:34:32] No, no. [3:34:33] There's no cap on how much they can donate. [3:34:34] But they get $1,700… [3:34:35] They get a $1,700 tax credit on their federal tax return. [3:34:39] For the first $1,700. [3:34:41] For the first $1,700 in total. [3:34:43] It's only $1,700. [3:34:44] If they contribute $5 million, they only get $1,700, is my understanding. [3:34:48] Right, right. [3:34:49] And so governors have said… [3:34:50] Okay, so my question would be who governs what happens to the money? [3:34:58] Who benefits from that money? [3:35:01] These are scholarship-granting organizations or 501 organizations that are within the states. [3:35:09] The money goes into those organizations. [3:35:11] The governor has to approve that organization, et cetera, and then… [3:35:16] The governor approves the organization. [3:35:19] The governor, or if it's the State Board of Education, ever how the state… [3:35:22] Yeah, you said… [3:35:23] If I could just finish it, ever how the state has it set up to govern, typically it's the governor. [3:35:28] Okay. [3:35:29] Well, you said that they're primarily for low-income students. [3:35:32] Is there a requirement that the state primarily benefit low-income students? [3:35:36] No, it's… [3:35:37] No, it's… [3:35:38] No, there's not a… [3:35:40] There's no regulation on to that. [3:35:42] Okay. [3:35:43] You've heard about the TRIO program. [3:35:44] You know that opens opportunities for many students who ordinarily wouldn't have considered [3:35:51] college. [3:35:52] And then you have the student loan cap, which really denies opportunities for people who might… [3:35:58] low-income students who might want to go to medical school because they, for some reason, [3:36:04] you want to cap this. [3:36:05] Isn't it true that the default rate on those with medical degrees and large loans is lower [3:36:12] than the other default rates? [3:36:14] Yes. [3:36:17] Okay. [3:36:18] The Institute for Educational Sciences, the 2025 appropriations hasn't been totally spent. [3:36:28] Can we get a commitment from you that you're going to spend all of the funds that have [3:36:32] been appropriated for the Institute of Educational Sciences? [3:36:36] Yes. [3:36:37] We are… [3:36:38] We're evaluating all this funds. [3:36:41] Does the Department of Education have a strategy for dealing with the mental health [3:36:46] challenges created by ICE, going to schools and capturing students and parents, the mental [3:36:53] health implications on other students who are left behind? [3:36:58] Does the Department of Education have a program to respond to that mental health crisis? [3:37:03] You know, we have not reduced any of our mental health funding at all. [3:37:12] So the mental health funding… [3:37:13] Do you specifically have a program to deal with the mental health crisis created by ICE coming [3:37:19] in and capturing students? [3:37:20] I'm not sure I totally agree with your framing of that, but that is handled by the Department of Homeland Security. [3:37:26] The Department of Homeland Security. [3:37:27] I'll take that as a no. [3:37:29] On the block grant program, you said that you want the states to spend the money where [3:37:34] they know it needs to be spent. [3:37:35] Correct. [3:37:36] But it's less money, isn't it? [3:37:37] Less money in total, but there's less regulation involved with that money as well. [3:37:42] Okay. [3:37:43] How much less? [3:37:46] You know, for a specific dollar amount, but I can…let me check the number here. [3:37:53] You know, we've looked at…the absolute total difference in the budget is about a half of [3:37:59] one percent for a state. [3:38:02] Half of… [3:38:03] Reduction in expenditures. [3:38:05] Half of one percent of what? [3:38:07] The state budget. [3:38:08] Of the state budget? [3:38:10] Mm-hmm. [3:38:11] We're combining a lot of the different programs. [3:38:14] The state budget. [3:38:15] The total state budget? [3:38:17] For these programs that are consolidated. [3:38:21] So you…you consolidate all the programs and you reduce the total by one half of one [3:38:27] percent? [3:38:28] Correct. [3:38:29] No. [3:38:31] No. [3:38:32] You… [3:38:41] I'd be happy to work with you and show you that. [3:38:43] Yeah, you need to…can you check with your staff… [3:38:45] Sure. [3:38:46] …to see what she's saying? [3:38:47] It's not one half of one percent. [3:38:49] One half of one percent of the consolidated budget. [3:38:53] Unless I'm looking at…unless I'm conflating a program, I don't think I am. [3:38:57] I'll get back to you. [3:38:58] Of the…of the programs that you have block granted… [3:39:00] Mm-hmm. [3:39:01] …how much less will they be able to spend in total? [3:39:04] So the total budget is being reduced by about 4.4 billion dollars. [3:39:10] Okay. [3:39:13] That's probably more than one half of one percent. [3:39:15] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:39:16] I think my time has expired. [3:39:17] I thank the gentlemen. [3:39:21] I thank each…each of the members for their attention today to the… [3:39:25] …to the opportunity with our secretary. [3:39:27] Now I recognize the ranking member for his closing remarks. [3:39:32] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [3:39:35] First, I…I feel compelled to respond to the gentleman from Missouri who… [3:39:40] …suggested that generations ago, Democrats supported segregation and opposed civil rights laws. [3:39:47] Well, he's right. [3:39:50] Generations ago, they did. [3:39:53] But Democrats kicked those people out of our party and now they're all Republicans. [3:39:59] And the gentleman's own state chose what they think of civil rights because they… [3:40:03] …called a special session for the sole purpose of redistricting a member of the Congressional Black Caucus out of his district. [3:40:11] And then went home. [3:40:13] The sole purpose of the entire session. [3:40:16] And the other…the other state is so intent on discriminating that when the Supreme Court told that state… [3:40:22] …that they could potentially redistrict their state in a discriminatory manner… [3:40:27] …the date…the state viewed that opportunity as a state of emergency… [3:40:34] …and called a special session to respond to that opportunity. [3:40:37] So, he's right. [3:40:39] That's the way things used to be. [3:40:41] But I think if he wants to look at things the way they are, they're a lot different than they… [3:40:46] …used to be. [3:40:47] So, Madam Secretary, thank you for being with us today. [3:40:52] Today's hearing is made clear that this administration… [3:40:55] …is dismantling the Department of Education without regard to the consequences for students and families. [3:41:01] When civil rights investigators are fired, students lose protections. [3:41:07] When oversight of student loan services is weakened, millions of borrowers are left vulnerable to misinformation and mistakes. [3:41:15] When education and research is halted, we lose critical knowledge about how we support students and educators. [3:41:21] And when programs are shifted to agencies without expertise to administer them, students pay the price. [3:41:28] This is not about returning education to the states. [3:41:31] The states already control curriculum, staffing, and just about all other education policy. [3:41:37] The federal role is to protect equal access to education, particularly students with disabilities, low-income students, rural students, [3:41:47] students facing discrimination, and decentralize and conduct educational research to improve educational outcomes. [3:41:54] Congress has never authorized the dismantling of the Department. [3:41:59] We did not approve with the staffing cuts. [3:42:01] We had never approved the interagency agreements or resulting administrative chaos. [3:42:06] But behind every one of these decisions are real people, like a borrower trying to navigate repayment, [3:42:13] or a parent filing a civil rights complaint, or a student with disabilities fighting for services that they are entitled to by law. [3:42:23] The American people deserve accountability, transparency, and a government that fulfills its legal obligations, [3:42:29] not experiments carried out at students' expense. [3:42:33] So I look forward to the Secretary's answers to questions we didn't have time to get to under the five-minute format. [3:42:39] And I yield back the balance of my time. [3:42:42] I thank the gentleman, and I thank the Secretary for being here, and appreciate the fact that we've had an opportunity to ask all the questions we want within five minutes. [3:42:56] And in fact, the chairman has been a little bit more liberal in allowing more than five minutes for most of the members that were here. [3:43:04] But nonetheless, I think some of these questions aren't going to be answered to the satisfaction of some. [3:43:11] That's what happens in a system where we have checks and balances that come from party majorities and minorities, [3:43:20] but more importantly, what takes place when decisions are made that are approved by the majority and desired. [3:43:28] More importantly, those decisions that result from what constituents want and how they vote in elections. [3:43:37] And we know that there is a tremendous amount of dissatisfaction on what's happening in our educational setting in this United States of America. [3:43:47] The fact that we are challenged with other countries, and we can talk about the size of those countries, etc., [3:43:55] but nonetheless, America is dropping behind. [3:43:58] Our NAEP scores show that. [3:44:00] We also see the cost of education. [3:44:03] But most recently, for the last four years, we saw significant costs going to taxpayers [3:44:08] and just assumed that they would accept the pay off student loan debt for debt that they never took on themselves [3:44:15] and never experienced any positive outcome from the debt that was accrued by students who were going to universities. [3:44:22] And in many ideas, they were being indoctrinated or intimidated on the campuses that we have. [3:44:30] We also know that we don't have the votes to abolish the U.S. Department of Education. [3:44:37] I know that as chairman of this committee. [3:44:39] I'd like to see it abolished. [3:44:41] I don't think it's proved itself to function well. [3:44:44] Over $3 trillion expended since 1980 when it was put in place and we're going backwards. [3:44:49] Madam Secretary, I appreciate the fact that you are finding creative ways, I believe totally legal ways, [3:44:55] to run your department and to do it in a way that ultimately uses what we have laid out in front of us now, [3:45:03] but used in a way with creativity, austerity, with transparency, and with the ability to say we're going to get the job done. [3:45:13] And if it means that we add back to the responsibilities of the Department of Labor, Department of Treasury, [3:45:20] Department of Health and Human Services, the opportunity for them to assist us in the educational endeavors [3:45:27] and meeting those unique needs, so be it. [3:45:31] So I think it comes down today to a very clear differentiation between, I believe, two parties. [3:45:38] And I'm going to take my friends and colleagues on the Democrat side of the aisle, as I will take those on the Republican side, [3:45:46] that we want to see quality education. [3:45:48] We want to see students learn. [3:45:50] We want to see a transparency that's out there. [3:45:54] Except there is a difference. [3:45:56] I think our side of the aisle is willing, Madam Secretary, to say, let's find out how to work it. [3:46:03] And we're not going to be subjected to simply saying no to change. [3:46:09] We want to see change. [3:46:12] Because in the end, if change produces a quality education, which I believe you want, that's all I want. [3:46:21] And if it's done by some of our same departments and they can now step up to the plate and do the work to success, so be it. [3:46:31] Wonderful. [3:46:32] If we have to yank it away from entities that aren't doing the work or are unnecessary, so be it. [3:46:39] As I've said since the beginning of my chairmanship of this committee, when we get three things right, we'll succeed. [3:46:47] If we get education related to the student, the parent, and the teacher right, that relationship done well, I think we'll have quality education. [3:47:02] So thank you for sharing your comments and all of the questions we gave. [3:47:06] We appreciate seeing the budget. [3:47:08] We certainly will continue to do oversight. [3:47:10] That is our responsibility. [3:47:12] And we appreciate the fact you're willing to come before us. [3:47:16] Having nothing more, well, nothing more necessary to say, and no other action to be taken in this committee, I declare adjourned.