[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
REVIEW OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON THE
1999 CONGRESSIONAL COMMISSION ON
SERVICEMEMBERS AND VETERANS
TRANSITION ASSISTANCE REPORT
___________
Thursday, December 7, 2006
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:02 p.m., in Room 334, Cannon
House Office Building, Hon. John Boozman [chairman of the subcommittee]
Presiding.
Present: Representatives Boozman, Baker, Brown-Waite, Campbell,
Bilbray, Herseth, Hooley and Evans.
Mr. Boozman. I apologize for running a little bit late. There
is just a lot of stuff going on up here right now in an effort to
wind things down.
The final hearing of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity will
come to order.
Today is the last House Veterans� Affairs Committee hearing of the
109th Congress. It is also Pearl Harbor Day, and I hope each of
us will take a moment to remember the souls that were lost that
day. Fortunately, I do not believe this will be a day that goes
in the history books as a day of infamy.
Before we begin today�s official business, I want to extend my
sincere appreciation for the bipartisan spirit that has been the
hallmark of our operation for the last 2 years. I especially
want to thank our Ranking Member, Stephanie Herseth, for the
work she has done and the manner in which she has done it. I
could not have had a better Ranking Member.
To our staffs, I also want to say thanks for their efforts over
the past 2 years; and for those who will be leaving us, you go
with our best wishes. I really do mean that. I appreciate you
guys so much.
Right now, we are in the situation where the country is unhappy
with us in the sense that there is a lot of wrangling going on
that is unnecessary. But, I think the Committee overall, the
entire Committee, has operated in a bipartisan manner ever
since I have been in Congress, if we could mimic that
throughout Congress we would be a lot better off.
Now there is a rumor that Ms. Herseth will be changing titles
in a few weeks, and at that time I will hand her the gavel and
truly will wish her my best wishes and do all that we can to
be helpful.
First, Congressman Simpson has asked for permission to enter
a statement record. Without objection, so ordered.
[The statement of Michael K. Simpson appears on p. 37]
Mr. Boozman. During the 109th Congress, the Economic
Opportunity Subcommittee spent considerable effort conducting
oversight of the transition assistance programs and the GI
Bill. We did that because we felt that the best thing we
could do for those leaving military service and those
remaining in uniform was to ensure that the process of
returning to civilian life was reasonably smooth and offered
the chance to obtain gainful employment.
Did we find the perfect system? No. Did we find the system
that provides good basic information assistance? I believe
that we did. But, like many government programs, the system
can be made to work better, and that is why we are here today.
Because, in the end, it is all about a good civilian job,
whether it is right out of the service or following shorter
extended training and education periods.
In January, 1999, in response to Public Law 104-275, the
Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition
Assistance issued its report. In general, the Commission was
tasked to, number one, review the adequacy and effectiveness
of veterans� transition assistance and benefits programs and
providing assistance to members of the Armed Forces in making
the transition and adjustment to civilian life; reviewing the
allocation under the law of responsibility for the administration
of the veterans� assistance and benefits programs among the
various departments and agencies of the government and determine
the feasibility and desirability of consolidating such
administration; thirdly, to evaluate proposals for improving such
programs, including the proposals for alternative means of
providing services delivered by such programs; and, fourth, make
recommendations to Congress regarding the need for improvements
in such programs.
The Commission met for several years, and the results from the
report was wide ranging in its views addressing the many issues
facing servicemembers who were transitioning to civilian life.
Following the release of the report, the House Veterans� Affairs
Committee formally received the views of the Commission.
There has been a lot of water under the bridge since then, so,
continuing with our focus on employment and transition issues,
we thought it would be fitting to close out the 109th Congress
with a review of how far we have come relative to the
Commission�s recommendations and to set the stage for the 110th
Congress.
I now yield to Ms. Herseth for her opening comments.
[The statement of Mr. Boozman appears on p. 35]
Ms. Herseth. Thank you, Chairman Boozman; and good afternoon to
you.
Before we begin, I also want to express my gratitude to you for
your leadership on this subcommittee and for the bipartisan
approach that you have taken to our work. The very good
relationship that members of our staff have shared over the past
couple of years and our working relationship and personal
friendship are a mark of what our constituents would hope would
be the manner in which we conduct our business here in
Washington. I anticipate that our working relationship will
continue on this subcommittee and the full Committee, and we
look forward to that as we build upon the work that we have
undertaken in the 109th Congress into the next one.
There are so many matters that are before us as it relates to
our servicemembers, veterans and military families and the
future. I want to thank all of today�s witnesses for your
insights, for the written testimony that you have submitted and
your time today. Your views and insights are critically
important to this subcommittee as we examine policies and
recommendations concerning servicemembers� transitions to
civilian life in their veteran status.
Mr. Chairman, we ask a great deal of our servicemembers, as all
of us in this room understand. We ask a lot of our veterans
and military families, perhaps more than any other segment of
our society. No doubt they have earned and deserve our best
efforts to provide them with a quality and enlightened process
as they prepare and ultimately separate from military service.
In my opinion, military recruiting and overall morale could be
improved by ensuring a quality transition process and providing
new and improved opportunities for veterans to explore in the
civilian workforce, entrepreneurial and higher education sectors.
A veteran and, perhaps more importantly, a military family that
experiences a successful transition to civilian life is arguably
more important than a Madison Avenue ad as it relates to purposes
of our all-volunteer force.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing the witnesses� testimony,
working with you, your staff, all of our colleagues on this
Committee, Ms. Hooley and her great work on the subcommittee to
examine and develop policies aimed to improve readjustment
services for men and women in uniform. Thank you, and I yield
back.
[The statement of Ms. Herseth appears on p. 38]
Mr. Boozman. Ms. Hooley.
Ms. Hooley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here this afternoon and for
this Committee to review the progress made by the Department
of Veterans Affairs, Labor and Defense regarding the
implementation of the recommendations of the 1999 Congressional
Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance
Report.
The issues surrounding the transition of our servicemembers and
veterans are of great interest to me personally.
I worked during the last several appropriations cycles to add
funds to the Department of Labor for the purpose of educating
employers on their responsibility under Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Act (USERRA), and I look forward to
hearing from the Department representatives.
One of the issues I have been particularly involved in has been
the reintegration of the Oregon National Guard members who are
returning from long deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan-Guard
and Reserve members. I sometimes think we forget how different
their return is from the regular military, but they face unique
challenges as they often transition directly from a war zone
back into civilian life without the support network provided by
the active duty base.
They are coming home to go back to work in their businesses or
to return to school. The life they face post-deployment is
radically different from their lives as active duty soldiers.
In many cases, they may not have the support of a job, or
family life may be dramatically altered.
Despite an increase in reliance on the Guard and Reserve
members, in many cases they are still treated as second-class
citizens by our government. One of the areas where this is
most apparent is in the Montgomery GI Bill benefits. Although
we have made improvements to the educational benefits for
Guard and Reserve members in recent years, they still receive
a significantly smaller benefit than the active duty
counterparts that they serve side by side with. They face a
confusing array of options for educational benefits with
various limitations and restrictions and in many cases can
only use their benefits while they remain in the Selective
Reserve, making it virtually impossible for them to use
their earned benefits.
When we talk about the reintegration of returning
servicemembers and the transition from military to civilian
life, we must make certain we are looking out for all of our
veterans, not simply those who served as part of the regular
active duty military. It is long past time we stop treating
our Guard and Reserve members as second-class soldiers and
give them the reintegration services that they need and
deserve.
Thank you.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you.
I am pleased that the former VA Secretary and Chairman of the
Commission, Anthony Principi, is here to testify with us.
He has a unique perspective as a former VA Secretary and
Chairman of the Commission.
Secretary Principi is accompanied by the Vice Chairman of the
Commission Mr. Kim Wincup.
The Secretary, during the BRAC hearings, I had the opportunity
to work with him on that. He has a son in the Air Force. Is
he still at Little Rock Air Force Base?
Mr. Principi. I am sorry, sir?
Mr. Boozman. Your son, is he still at Little Rock Air Force
Base?
Mr. Principi. He is.
Mr. Boozman. He has a son at Little Rock Air Force Base. And
this young man, I think half of my staff fell in love with him
when they met him, but we are very proud of him. Be sure and
tell him, send him our best.
Mr. Principi. I sure will, Mr. Chairman.
He just came back from Iraq, and he is back in Little Rock, and
I think he is very very happy to be back at Little Rock. But I
appreciate that, and I know he enjoyed very much meeting you
and your staff.
Mr. Boozman. Well, tell him that we are very proud of him.
Mr. Principi. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI, FORMER CHAIRMAN,
CONGRESSIONAL COMMISSION ON SERVICEMEMBERS AND VETERANS TRANSITION
ASSISTANCE, ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO PUBLIC LAW 104-275, AND FORMER
SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; ACCOMPANIED BY THE
HON. G. KIM WINCUP, D VETERANS TRANSITION ASSISTANCE, ESTABLISHED
PURSUANT TO PUBLIC LAW 104-275
Mr. Principi. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Herseth, Congresswoman Hooley.
I am pleased to be joined by Vice Chairman Wincup and also
Commissioner Jane, who served on the Commission, Commissioner
Drach as well, and Bob Stein, who is our Executive Director;
and I thank them for being here.
I also want to recognize Deputy Secretary Mansfield, who served
as my deputy for much of my 4 years as Secretary and with such
great, great dedication and loyalty; and I am very very pleased
to see him here today as well.
I commend you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Herseth, for
convening today�s hearing. Under your bipartisan leadership,
this subcommittee has indeed established an enviable record of
achievement over the last 2 years. With site hearings and
markups, you have convened no less than 12 public events with
respect to the Montgomery GI Bill, an extraordinarily important
statute, and other VA educational assistance programs and nine
events focusing on the transition assistance program.
Further, an end-of-session and end-of-Congress public hearing
like today�s I think speaks volumes of your commitment to our
men and women in uniform, our Nation�s veterans, to your
leadership and, of course, to that of your outstanding staffs
as well. Vice Chairman Wincup and I earnestly thank you.
The ultimate measure of successful transition from military to
civilian life is long-term, sustained employment.
Fundamentally, employing veterans represents a good business
decision because of their character, their commitment, their
sense of teamwork, their resolve. Hiring veterans for
patriotic reasons expresses appreciation and respect. Hiring
veterans for business reasons indeed gets results.
Vice Chairman of General Motors, Bob Lutz, observed that
veterans personify economic strength. Like you, Mr. Lutz sees
veterans as a unique national resource and competitive business
asset.
But we, as a Nation, have an urgent challenge before us. We
need more Bob Lutzes. We need to do a much better job
conveying to employers the value-added human capital and
resourcefulness that veterans bring to our domestic economy
and especially convey it to the human resource professionals
who actually do the hirings in corporate America. If we don�t
do so, the unemployment rate for 20- to 24-year-old veterans
may become even more unacceptable than it already is.
But this situation goes beyond unacceptable numbers. It is
our obligation as a Nation to be part of what we might call a
public trust with those who have served. We need to be there
for them when they come home, because they lag 4 years beyond
their nonveteran peers. Let�s level the playing field in that
regard simply by marketing veterans with employers, nothing
more and nothing less.
My written statement makes seven recommendations in this regard.
Let�s mobilize the ample resources of Federal and State
government, business and industry, the veterans� groups, the
military associations and the media to get the job done.
Just as veterans personify economic strength, the Congress and
this Committee personified strength of vision in creating the
Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance.
None of us knew in 1997 of the magnitude of worldwide hostilities
that lay ahead and the challenges the 1.5 million American
soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coastguardsmen would
face in protecting the everyday freedoms of 300 million
Americans.
Your leadership in forming the Commission led to the most
comprehensive review of veterans� benefits and services since
the 1956 Omar Bradley Commission. The Commission learned
quickly that the panoply of veterans� benefits was rooted in
the Great Depression, the Great War, and the Great Society.
Thanks to the wisdom and foresight of America�s veterans and
military organizations, we concluded, too, that we, as a
Nation, had designed these programs for a different era, a
different economy, a different society, a different technology,
and indeed, a different veteran.
Just as Harry Colmery of the American Legion penned the first
draft of the World War II GI Bill of Rights in longhand on
Mayflower Hotel stationery at about this time in 1944, the
veterans and military groups recommended to us a similarly
bold, unfettered blueprint of ideas for the Commission�s
report. If the Commission�s recommendations represented a
solid foundation for congressional action, then this very
Committee created strong pillars of opportunity for the
175,000 servicemembers who annually join our domestic economy.
Indeed, the record shows that many such transition
opportunities emerge from the rostrum of this subcommittee.
In Table I of my written statement, I highlight several of the
Commission recommendations that, with your Senate counterparts,
Congress has enacted into law, including the largest increase
in the 21-year history of the Montgomery GI Bill. Many of
those increases originated right here in this Committee:
A nationwide redesign of veterans� jobs placement service based
on themes of accountability, flexibility, incentive, and
results; creation of the first economic set-asides in Federal
contracting for disabled veteran-owned businesses that the
Association of Service Disabled Veterans and the Vietnam Veterans
of America tell us were first proposed as far back as the White
House Conference on Small Business in 1979; and the first major
updating of VA�s on-job training and apprenticeship program
since World War II. Indeed, you have created economic
initiatives that produced a new building of economic opportunity
and reinforced all pillars that have stood the test of time.
Today�s structure, however, needs design changes, occasioned by
America�s implicit commitment to those who wear the military
uniform during a period of war and mobilization against insidious
terrorist acts. The structure of economic opportunity urgently
needs not an annex but a new centerpiece, an atrium if you will,
formed from the bedrock of America�s employers. They alone
decide who gets hired, especially among the mid- and entry-level
type positions veterans covet when they return home.
I urgently encourage the subcommittee to design a
forward-looking, cost-effective package of initiatives to
market veterans to employers, a nationwide campaign that
penetrates the private sector with the uniqueness of the veteran
brand. We owe it to each of those who have served, to employers,
to our economy and to ourselves. Veterans deserve a full
opportunity to participate in our economic system sustained by
their service and, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Herseth,
Congresswoman Hooley, keep the interchangeable team intact
while doing so.
Mr. Chairman, in my written statement I have paid tribute to
the rich history of leadership personified by past chairmen on
the Committee on Veterans� Affairs and also to Representative
Lane Evans, who is retiring with an enviable record of
legislative achievement.
In closing, I pay tribute to Congressman Chairman Steve
Buyer. Chairman Buyer, too, has built durable pillars of
strength on which I believe the Committee will build in the
new Congress. He is now in the distinguished company of
past chairmen who also were wartime veterans, including
Tiger Teague, the late Sonny Montgomery, the late Bob
Stump. I thank Mr. Buyer for his commitment and his record
of service.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ranking Member Herseth and
Congresswoman Hooley. Mr. Wincup and I will be pleased to
respond to your questions.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much.
[The statement of Anthony Principi appears on p. 39]
Mr. Boozman. In your testimony, I don�t know whether to call
you Mr. Secretary or Mr. Chairman or both, but you mention that
the GI Bill is basically the only situation we have where
there is a buy-in as far as being a part of the program. And
talking about maybe doing away with that, those are the kind of
things that we are going to be struggling with in the next
Congress.
But when you do the numbers, if you did away with the buy-in,
the $1,200, the figures I have heard, that that would translate
to about $100 a month in benefit. So another way of looking at
it would be to go ahead and continue the buy-in and increase
the benefit and still spend the same amount of money.
Can you comment on that at all?
Mr. Principi. Yes. Sure. I was part of the-I was in the
Senate at the time. Mr. Wincup was in the House. We were both
on the Armed Services Committee; and, of course, the Montgomery
GI Bill originated here in the House. There was some resistance
in the Senate to the first peacetime GI Bill; and the compromise,
if I recall, was to have the $1,200 buy-in as a way to get the
House and the Senate to come to agreement at about 4:00 in the
morning in the dome of this Capitol in room 407. I will
remember that night for as long as I live.
But I believe, too, that as the Honorable Chris Jane, who was
commissioner, said at one point in time, University of Chicago
educated economist, that the $1,200 was really nothing more
than a tax. And given what we call upon our men and women to
do today and around the world, not just in Iraq and
Afghanistan but on the front tiers of freedom, perhaps it is
time we look at doing away with it or, as you indicate, I
think in the alternative to increase the benefit somehow to
make it more attractive.
You know, the Pell grants are a wonderful program, but a lot
of people can get educational benefits in this country without
having to serve-educational benefits without having to serve
their country. So whether we-we certainly in the Commission
recommended doing away with the $1,200 buy-in; and the
alternative, as you indicate, perhaps increasing the benefit
proportionately, I think would work as well.
Mr. Boozman. With all the sources of assistance available now-,
we have got the Internet, we have TAP, outstationing of VA and
DOL staff, unemployment benefits. You know, you have lived
through this. You have a son that is serving now. Why do you
think the transition now is so difficult or appears to be so
difficult?
Mr. Principi. Why the transition?
Mr. Boozman. Why the transition out of the service back into
civilian life. It seems to be difficult right now, with overall
unemployment low and, just a multitude of various options
available to help in the transition.
Mr. Principi. Well, I know it is still very difficult. When you
look at the unemployment rate for 20- to 24-year-olds, you know
clearly something is wrong; and we recommend that that be studied
as to what is the true reason for that higher unemployment rate.
I mean, I think it is about 10.8 percent for veterans between the
age of 20-24, maybe 8 percent unemployment rate on average for
nonveterans, so we simply need to do better.
You know, I have always believed that if employment is the door to
a successful transition, then education is the key to that door.
And whether it be a college education or on-the-job training,
apprenticeship training, I think we just simply need to do more to
outreach to veterans, to tell them of the programs that are
available that are either paid by the VA or paid by the Department
of Labor. We need to do a better job, perhaps re-establishing the
Committee to outreach to employers to make them aware of the
benefits of hiring veterans. So I think there is a lot that still
needs to be done, especially given this wartime situation we are
in.
Mr. Boozman. Ms. Herseth.
Ms. Herseth. Thank you, Mr. Secretary; and I do appreciate your
point to the Committee about an opportunity to put together a
package of initiatives and generate some ideas on how we can
penetrate the private sector as effectively as possible for the
benefit of our transitioning servicemembers.
Before I get to some questions there, I do want to piggyback onto
the questions that the chairman posed as it relates to the
importance of education benefits that also allude to Ms. Hooley�s
points in her opening statement about reservists and National
Guardsmen and so the timing of the Commission that you chaired in
your report and some of the hearings that we have had that you
made reference to as it relates to the importance of the
Montgomery GI Bill and how we make sure it is working effectively
for all of our servicemembers, whether they be active duty or
in their Reserve and Guard components.
Could you elaborate on what your thoughts are in bringing the
educational benefits for National Guard and reservists more in
line with their active duty counterparts and what are your
thoughts-this is something that we probed down in Arkansas when
we had a field hearing there with one of the leaders of the
Arkansas National Guard-on providing post-service educational
benefits to activated reservists?
Mr. Principi. Well, you know, I can�t say enough about the
role of the Selective Reserve and the Guard in today�s
all-volunteer force. It is just extraordinary to me what they
do, how they do it, and their commitment. The benefit level
really needs to be commensurate with that sacrifice, and I think
there have been significant improvements in the benefit level
for Guard and reservists.
I think there is more that can be done in perhaps increasing the
benefit level, the educational benefit level. I think there
should be a differential between the active force and the Reserve
and Guard because of the-you know, you are on active duty for
4 years in the Guard and Reserve. And although you are called up
to active duty much more often it is clearly not the same. So I
think in order to encourage young men and women to go in the
active force, we should have a little higher benefit level, but,
clearly, more needs to be done in that regard.
Kim, do you have anything you would like to add?
Mr. Wincup. Congresswoman, I think your-both points are unique.
We are asking something of the Guard and Reserve we have never
done in the past in terms of the degree to which they are
deploying, and they are about to redeploy in the second round of
deployments that are under consideration so I think we are going
to find stresses on those folks that we haven�t really seen in
any of our histories.
So I would agree with the Chairman strongly that some further
consideration for benefits for them would be warranted, although
you do need to keep some differentiation between them and the
active force.
Ms. Herseth. I appreciate your thoughts. I don�t think that we
have seen either members of the Committee or some of the
organizations that we all work with that help us represent our
constituents while addressing this issue talking about doing
away with the differential, but we have seen over time a smaller
and smaller percentage, particularly as it relates to the buying
power of that educational benefit because of what has happened
at the Department of Defense and the budget constraints in the
last few years with OIF and OEF as well as prior to that.
I don�t think that there is so much a strong recommendation to
do away with the differential but rather, as we have attempted
to do for those that have been activated for a certain period
of time, that we increase that benefit under Chapter 1607.
I do think that we have a more difficult challenge here in making
sure that those benefits should be allowed to be used by Guard
and reservists in terms of post-service education. I think that
the testimony that we have received thus far versus what we have
heard from the Pentagon suggests that that isn�t going to affect
recruitment and retention as significantly as the Pentagon claims.
Do you think that it might be easier for us, assuming that we
maintain a differential as you have both suggested, to deal with
increasing the benefit for Guard and reservists if we were able
to consolidate legislative jurisdiction over the Montgomery GI
Bill into one Committee rather than two? As you know, we
currently have jurisdiction over the active duty program and the
Armed Services Committee has jurisdiction over the Selective
Reserve program.
Mr. Principi. Well, I think there sometimes is a disconnect
between the two Committees and the level of benefits, and perhaps
that consolidation is something that should be looked at and
studied.
Again, I applaud this Committee for what they have done. I
remember when I started as Secretary back in 2001, the benefit
level under the GI Bill was 500 and maybe 50 or 80 dollars a
month. And over a 4 to 5-year period during my tenure, I believe
it is now over a thousand dollars a month, and I believe the
Guard and Reserve benefit has gone up substantially as well.
So you have made extraordinary progress in a relatively short
period of time, making it possible for men and women to go to
school. I mean, it is just as simple as that.
I have always been a believer in the World War II GI Bill. If
there is one benefit that I have always thought should be
carried over into the 21st century as the greatest legislative
benefit ever legislated by the United States Congress, that is
the World War II GI Bill. An individual limited only by
aspirations and ability can go to any school in America. The
greatness of America can be found in the men and women who went
to school under the GI Bill after World War II, and I think that
is an investment that is worth making for the men and women who
are doing extraordinary things today. I think it is great for
them, it is great for our Nation.
Mr. Wincup. May I just chime in?
As former Staff Director of the House Armed Services Committee,
I am-I guess I am not without history in this regard, but I
remember the same dialogue that my chairman does. And, frankly,
having two Committees to bring that along-it was not an easy
piece of legislation to get enacted initially, and having two
Committees and having a broader base for it at that point in
time made a lot of difference.
Ms. Herseth. Along the lines of what you both have just said,
I think you would find broad agreement among the Committee and
many of our colleagues about the investment in the benefits and
what the Montgomery GI Bill has been and can be and can continue
to be, but I think we can build on it further. While I
appreciate the comments that we have done a lot to help the
Guard and Reserve, I still have a concern.
When you talk about a marketing strategy, of marketing our
veterans to the private sector, we have to make sure that
whatever we do and authorize to improve education benefits is
marketed to the servicemembers. I don�t think the Chapter
1607 benefits have necessarily all the information that should
have been given to Guard and reservists to take advantage of
that, has been effectively given to them.
I do think that if it had been administered differently-I
just think we have to look at marketing in two respects here,
not just to the employers but to the beneficiaries, whether
it is the employment opportunity or the education benefits.
Do you have thoughts on this?
Mr. Principi. If I could, absolutely, Congresswoman. It is
far different coming back to a military base. You know, you
demobilize, go through programs. When you come back as a
reservist or Guard, you go back to your community, and
sometimes you don�t get the information you need, know about
the benefits available.
So I agree with-I agree. Marketing education, making sure
they have that information is important. I know the VA is
doing-has worked hard at it. I am not saying they are there
yet or we are there yet, but improvements have been made. I
think we still have a way to go.
Ms. Herseth. And I would agree. I think there is an element
of interagency cooperation that is necessary here as well,
given the current construct of how we are authorizing and
then implementing the new legislation.
One last question, and certainly we don�t have the
development and the-what is the word I am looking for-from
one generation from another the last time there had been a
Commission. I believe you mentioned 56 to the Commission
that you chaired, talking about how it is a different era,
different veteran, different technology, different economy.
We don�t have that same level of disconnect today from the
late 1990s to 2007.
However, in light of the fact that we weren�t at war at
that time and looking at the increased mission tempo for
Guard and Reserve as well as other factors, do you think
it is time for Congress to authorize a new Commission on
Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance? Or do
we have plenty to continue to work from based on your work?
Mr. Principi. Well, the last Commission was 1997. We are
almost at the 10-year point. We are in war. Different
needs have been identified, not only on the benefit side of
the House but the healthcare side of the House. It might
be time in the next Congress to look at convening another
Commission to take a look at the benefit structure see if
it is the right one for the times.
You know, I am very proud that-you know, you never know
with the work of the Commission what is going to happen,
but we were very fortunate to see Congress embrace the
Commission recommendations for the most part, and it is not
a report that gathered dust on some shelf and just consumed
money and nothing ever happened. What I think makes all of
us commissioners so proud is that the Congress took up these
issues, and they legislated, and veterans in our society are
better off for it. So I think perhaps next Congress you
might want to look at that.
Ms. Herseth. I appreciate that; and I will yield back.
Chairman Boozman and I wondered if you would be interested in
chairing another Commission.
Mr. Principi. As long as it is not BRAC.
Mr. Boozman. Ms. Hooley.
Ms. Hooley. Secretary Principi, first of all, I just want to
thank you for chairing BRAC and for all of your time that you have
put in and service to the country and for all of the work that you
have done. You have just done a terrific job. So I appreciate
your public service over a number of years in a number of
different roles. So thank you for that.
Mr. Principi. Thank you.
Ms. Hooley. And I am going to follow up on some of the things
that Representative Herseth talked about. Times have changed so
much and who knew that we were going to have Guard and Reserve
deployed and redeployed and redeployed and some of them are on
their fourth time over there, some are on their third time, some
are on their second time. And as we look at benefits-
And I agree with you. I think one of the greatest things this
country ever did was the GI Bill. It really was the making of a
new America and how many new universities sprung up because of
the GI Bill and what wonderful opportunities they gave to
people. As we look at making sure that our veterans are
employed, it is sometimes difficult to employ some of the veterans
if they don�t have the educational background. I mean they really
work hand in hand.
There are a couple of questions I have.
One is, do we need to look at the cost of college and the cost of
tuition. It has gone up much higher than the cost of living, and
how often should we readjust that?
Again, looking at Guard and Reserve in a different light, based on
what is happening today, do we need to look at those benefits?
One of my constituents called with a really interesting story about
her son who had had some problems after he got out of the military,
who had some addictions, sort of struggled with life in general.
And when he finally got his act together and decided to go back to
school and really knew what he wanted, his benefits had run out
because it had been 10 years. So they were exhausted.
First of all, do you know the percentage of people that decided to
pay the $1,200 into the program so they get educational benefits?
And should there be a time limit?
I would like to know why there is a time limit and should we
continue that time limit?
This is sort of a question to anybody in the room that wants to
answer this. When you have two different jurisdictions over the
same issue when talking about veterans-even if we don�t change
those jurisdictions, does it make sense to have sort of a joint
Committee that works just on this issue-could we take some members
from this Committee and some members from the Armed Services to
work specifically on this issue.
And I don�t care where you want to start.
Mr. Principi. Well, thank you, Congressman Hooley, for your kind
words.
I want to say 97 percent of-I mean, a very, very high percentage of
men and women who join our military are automatically opted into
the GI Bill program. I believe-Kim, am I right-you have to opt out
of it. When you join, you are automatically enrolled, but you have
the option to say I don�t want to go to school. I want the $1,200
a month. So it is very, very high, which is very, very good news.
Unfortunately-at least I know the VA folks are here, and they know
better the percentage-but at one point in time during my tenure I
was surprised to learn that less than 50 percent were availing
themselves of the GI Bill, which-you know, 97 percent opt in, less
than 50 percent use their benefit. I am sure there are lots of
reasons for that, and perhaps that 10-year delimiting date might
have something to do with it.
Historically, there has always been a 10-year time period on using
your GI Bill. I believe the Committee should look at that. Maybe
it is time to say it should be 15 years or 20 years or there
should be no time period. It is a readjustment benefit, so I
guess one might say after 10 years it is really no longer a
readjustment benefit, but the GI Bill has always been considered
that.
I also think the Committee should look carefully at, you know,
college education is not for everyone; and there are a lot of other
wonderful programs that they should avail themselves of: on-the-job
training, apprenticeship training, you know, different-technology.
You know, these young men and women are so computer savvy. There
are a lot of schools they can attend, whether it be a Microsoft
school or, you know, whatever it might be. I think you should
look at some of the different ways that we can embrace different
types of education.
So I think all of those-and as far as the survey as to the
inflation rate in academia, I think every Congress there should be
some survey done as to is the GI Bill benefit keeping pace with
the inflation in education? And for the longest time it was not
until you have done so in the past 4 years.
Ms. Hooley. Right. Thank you.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you.
In kind of looking at how things are going right now, the
DVOPS/LVER system, do you feel that it has run its course? Is it
outmoded at the present time? Do we need to look at maybe some
changes in that area?
Mr. Principi. Well, I haven�t kept pace with it recently. I know
Secretary Ciccolella is here. He can certainly speak to the issue.
I recall that when our Commission was in session we were very,
very concerned with the program to assist-the Department of Labor
to assist veterans in getting good jobs. Unfortunately, there
was really no accountability. There was no incentive for success,
and there was no penalty for failure, and I believe that the DVOPs
and LEVRs were caught in a bad system.
I think some of the legislation that has been passed in recent
years has helped to correct that, and that is demonstrated in the
higher percentage of veterans who are registered at the Department
of Labor job placement centers have obtained employment. So I
believe that progress is being made, but, again, it was really
alarming to us back in 1997, 1998, 1999, the poor record of
performance in terms of veterans� employment.
Mr. Wincup. Mr. Chairman, I don�t have anything to add to that.
Thank you.
Mr. Boozman. Do you all have any other questions? Good.
Ms. Hooley. I have.
Mr. Boozman. Go ahead, Ms. Hooley.
Ms. Hooley. This is, hopefully, a shorter question.
As we look-this is what I have heard and I would like to know-it
is like a lot of things you hear. You don�t know how true it is
or how much basis of fact there is. We do know that a lot of our
men and women are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan with some
mental health issues, and I think most people would acknowledge
that is true. What I had heard is that there are some employers,
even though they may be breaking the law, that are worried about
hiring some of our soldiers returning for that reason.
First of all, is that true? And, secondly, how do we enforce the
law? And, third, how do we make sure that people are assured that
we are working with the soldiers and we are taking care of these
issues and this isn�t something that employers should be terribly
concerned about? This is a touchy subject to bring up, but I
think it is important that we talk about it.
Mr. Principi. I think it is a very important issue, considering
the nature of this war, insurgency warfare in a way much like
Vietnam, different setting but, nonetheless, a lot of
post-traumatic stress. So I think the basis of your question is
correct, that some employers are probably discriminating against
these young men and women because of perhaps perceived mental
illness.
As far as enforcing the law, it clearly needs to fall upon-I think
the Congress can play a role and State governments can play a role,
but certainly I believe that during my tenure-and I just know
certainly under Secretary Nicholson and, of course, Deputy
Secretary Mansfield who fought bravely in Vietnam that the VA is
doing as much as it possibly can to help those with PTSD and
other mentally related problems with all the help they can get.
I am just very proud of the VA, of what they have done. I am not
saying they are perfect, but I think they have done an
extraordinary job and also trying to break down the barriers
between DOD and VA and bring the two agencies closer together
so that there is a continuum of care when they are transitioning
out. It is far better than it was certainly when I left active
duty.
And your thoughts, Kim?
Mr. Wincup. Congresswoman, I am in the private sector and have
been for the last 12 years since I left the Federal Government
and I have not heard that, to be honest with you. I have
heard-from all I can tell, people are anxious to find veterans
for much the same reason we have talked about.
Ms. Hooley. I have heard both. Certainly, we have a lot of
employers, and in one of my counties, we have a great program.
Actually, one of the counties is doing it for the whole State,
where we are advertising, talking about USERRA, talking about
our soldiers, what wonderful employees they are and I have tried
to set an example by hiring them in my office. I think a lot of
employers want to hire veterans and do so, but I also have heard
this other little piece sort of buzzing around, and I just
wanted to know if there was any-I am sure for maybe a few, that
is true, but I guess what I would like to know, is that
prevalent? Or is that just an occasional employer outlook?
Mr. Wincup. I must say that there is something happening.
Because you look at these statistics, and they are disturbing.
The unemployment rate is higher than it should be. It is higher
than the average, and it isn�t better than it was. When over
the last 4, 5 years since we looked at it, it hasn�t improved
much. So there is something happening that I can�t account for,
but it seems counterintuitive.
Ms. Herseth. I would just add one final point to that then, that
perhaps if indeed the Committee chose to pursue authorization of
a new Commission that this would be an area that we would
specifically request evaluation as it relates to the enforcement
of USERRA and how best to do that, and if there is something
that we can get at that addresses that anomaly.
Mr. Boozman. I agree with both of you. I think this is
something, hopefully, we will be able to look at in the next
Congress. And I am lobbying a little bit. I think having the
Economic Opportunity Subcommittee has been helpful.
Because in the past when you are lumped with all of the other
benefit for veterans, so much of the time is spent putting out
fires, that we really have had the opportunity to look at some
things that maybe are being brushed over in the past because
they are more long-range things like employment and training.
Again, that is something that is going to have to be decided,
the framework of the Committee in the future, but, hopefully,
we will keep the subcommittee.
Thank you all so much for coming. Thank you, Mr. Wincup, for
all that you have done.
You mentioned, Mr. Secretary, some really some great people,
Sonny Montgomery, Bob Stump, those individuals, and certainly
you are in that class, and we appreciate all you have done for
veterans, all you continue to do for veterans, and thank you
very very much.
Mr. Principi. Thank you very much.
Mr. Boozman. Let�s have the next panel, please.
Today, we are really pleased to have Deputy Secretary of
Veterans� Affairs, The Honorable Gordon Mansfield. He will
be presenting testimony for VA. Assistant Secretary of Labor
for Veterans Employment and Training Charles Ciccolella will
review the Department of Labor�s progress; and, finally, the
Deputy Under Secretary for Military Community and Family
Policy, Ms. Leslye Arsht, will speak on behalf of the Department
of Defense.
We appreciate you all being here.
Mr. Boozman. You want to start, Gordon?
STATEMENTS OF THE HON. GORDON H. MANSFIELD, DEPUTY SECRETARY,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; HON. CHARLES S. CICCOLELLA,
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR VETERANS� EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; AND LESLYE A. ARSHT, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY
FOR MILITARY COMMUNITY AND FAMILY POLICY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE
STATEMENT OF THE HON. GORDON H. MANSFIELD
Mr. Mansfield. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, Ms. Herseth and Ms. Hooley, I want to thank you
for this opportunity to come talk to you about this issue of
importance to the Department of Veterans Affairs. I would ask
that my written statement be entered into the full record.
This hearing is about the recommendations made in 1999 by the
Transition Commission, headed, as we have just heard by former
VA Secretary Principi; and how the VA has responded to these
recommendations. VA has implemented many of the Commission�s
recommendations, as discussed fully in my statement for the
record.
I would make the point here, too, that many of those
recommendations were followed up with action by this
Subcommittee, this Committee, and the action by the Congress
to put new statutes in place. The VA has made every attempt
to fulfill the requirements, and I would just add my thanks
to the bipartisan effort that has gone forward in this
important area.
This hearing, though, is about the way forward. How do we, as
a Federal Government, respond to the employment needs of our
veterans, a talented and motivated workforce?
Secretary Nicholson seized on this issue when he became the
leader of the organization nearly 2 years ago. He has
participated or directed VA leaders in discussions with the
National Guard Bureau, the National Governors Association, and
with major employers to find ways to get veterans work. He
has also made inroads with his Cabinet colleagues, encouraging
them to consider employing veterans in their agencies.
It may be said that his efforts and those of others such as
Secretary Principi have paid off. In fiscal year �05, veterans
held 25 percent of all Federal jobs, increasing to 456,254 out
of a 1.8 million workforce and of which approximately 92,000
were disabled veterans employed in Federal positions.
Let me stress that Federal agencies share in the responsibility
of serving veterans. No one agency, as we know, has exclusive
jurisdiction over these issues. Veterans, their families and
our country will benefit from our ability to work
collaboratively. Whereby, as noted in the Commission documents,
the lines delimiting organizational jurisdiction and authority
should be invisible to the service member or veteran crossing
them. That is a valuable insight from the Principi Commission.
The Commission voiced concern 8 years ago in the disparity for
unemployment rates for young, recently separated veterans
compared to their peers and veterans in general. This continues
today and is a major issue of concern to VA. The high rate of
unemployment for young, recently separated veterans is
unacceptable, particularly now when it is they who have defended
our country in the war on terror. I can assure you that we are
focused on this cohort of veterans, be they active duty or be
they Guard or Reserve members, returning from their deployments.
Since the Commission�s report, profound changes have occurred in
the Nation. Naturally, much of the focus on today�s military
needs are on exiting servicemembers who are both young and who
have seen multiple tours of duty in an active combat zone. We
know enhanced Web-based technology give veterans access to a vast
array of information. It also allows for seamless connections
between government agencies which should enable us to more easily
provide services at a distance.
The changing economy, with significant career growth in high-tech
and service sectors and a more mobile workforce, creates added
opportunities for transitioning veterans but also makes
traditional service delivery more difficult.
In the report in 1999, the Commission wisely used as a guiding
principle the goal that each individual servicemember and veteran
should have as much control as possible over decisions affecting
his or her life. VA continues to seek ways to help veterans to
make informed decisions with this principle in place. There are
ways the VA can address the issues of separation, of career
transition and reintegration into civilian society. The Federal
role includes proper health screening to identify issues that
may inhibit full employment.
Recent research documents indicate that unemployment and
underemployment can be negative external stresses that impede
recovery from PTSD, issues talked about here earlier, and may
even trigger delayed onset. For those with severe combat
injuries, VA and DOD have a very successful model-VA�s Office
of Seamless Transition and DOD�s Severely Injured Center-for
ensuring that severely injured servicemembers, veterans and
their families are fully and effectively supported on their
path to successful reintegration into society.
We must ensure the earned and needed benefits are provided
as timely as possible to achieve maximum utilization by
veterans. The several months prior to separation and the
first year after separation, we believe, are critical to
successful reintegration.
We must also understand employment barriers. The VA, Department
of Labor and DOD are working collaboratively with your staffs on
designing and conducting a study in an attempt to find out why
young, recently separated veterans are suffering disproportionate
unemployment; and then we must meet younger veterans� needs with
tailored support during that critical transition period for
successful reintegrations.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I know that we can
help veterans complete a timely reintegration using the advantages
of new technologies and new approaches that have evolved in the
8 years since the Commission�s work. I want to make the point,
also, that we are looking for not just a job for this individual
coming out, we are looking for a career, a career of work that
will permit that veteran and their current or future family to be
able to live the American dream. So we want to make sure that it
isn�t just a job, but it has potential built into it.
I will continue to work with the others at this tabl,e as well as
the hundreds of private companies like Home Depot and Wal-Mart
who have stepped forward anxious to put skilled veterans on their
payrolls. I look forward to your questions.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much.
[The statement of Gordon H. Mansfield appears on p. 69]
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Ciccolella.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. CHARLES S. CICCOLELLA
Mr. Ciccolella. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member
Herseth, and Ms. Hooley. I want to thank you for holding this
hearing. I think it is a very, very important hearing. And I
think the timing could not be better. So I thank you for that.
It is an honor to appear on the panel with Secretary Mansfield
and Deputy Undersecretary Arsht. So I thank you for the
opportunity to present our views and where we think we are on
the Commission�s recommendations.
The Commission performed a very valuable service in identifying
the problems with transition for servicemembers and how they
come into employment opportunities. The Commission made some
very good proposals for improving the outcomes. Specifically,
the Commission was concerned, and I think duly so, with the
unacceptable employment rates for newly separated veterans;
performance standards of the Veterans Employment and Training
Service (VETS); and poor accountability of veteran employment
programs in general.
The Commission recommended replacing these programs with
restructured services establishing priorities, marketing of
veterans, and introducing competition to ensure that the
outcomes were acceptable.
As requested by the Committee, my written statement responds to
each of the 21, I think, recommendations of the Commission with
specifics. So what I would like to do is focus my oral
testimony on where we are today with regard to our employment
programs and what we are doing to improve employment
opportunities for veterans.
Probably the most significant outcome of the Transition Commission
was the Jobs For Veterans Act, Public Law 107-288, because that
law transformed the way veteran employment services are delivered
by establishing a priority of service to veterans for all
Department of Labor funded programs at job centers around the
country. The law also changed the funding formula so that money
goes to where the veterans are, it delineated the roles of the
veteran employment representatives, and this was extremely
important; and it focused employment services on veterans who need
those services the most; and of course, there was the incentive
awards, which has worked very well in some States, I think many
States, and in others, we are still struggling a little bit.
The Commission noted that, in 1997, only 12 percent of veterans
who registered with the employment service obtained permanent
employment. At the time of that report, entered employment rate
and entered employment placement rates, which was how we were
measuring them, averaged 20 to 30 percent across the States. Some
States reported even lower numbers. Today, the entered employment
rates for all veterans is 61 percent nationally. That is through
America�s publicly funded work force system, with many States
reporting higher rates. More significantly, we have talked about
the unemployment rate of young veterans 20 to 24 years old who
are also, in most cases, probably all recently separated. And
those seem to be coming down now from the peak last year of almost
16 percent, and we expect that 2007 rate to be somewhere between
10 and 12 percent. That rate is still unacceptable.
But what we tried to do is find out more about why that rate is
high, and we found out some things, and some things we still
don�t know. But that is why the Department of Labor, as Secretary
Mansfield has indicated, are collaborating on research that will
help us better understand all of the reasons why these young
veterans have higher unemployment rates. For example, the VA, in
collaboration with us at the Labor Department and with the Defense
Department, are surveying a large sample of veterans, about 2,000
of them, to determine why it takes so long to get their jobs.
There will be a comparison there with the Reserve components and
the active duty folks. And at the Department of Labor, we are
working with the University of Chicago right now to look at some
longitudinal data. That is data that obviously we get by
questioning a specific cohort until 1997 about their employment
opportunities and outcomes over the length of their employment
lives.
What that research is telling us is that when young veterans first
get out of the military, their unemployment rates are high up in
the 30 percent range; 3 months later, they are down in the 20s;
6 months later, they are down in the teens; and 9 months later,
they are generally 4 to 6 percent, which is about the Nation�s-
about the national average.
So it is telling us a number of things, that while unemployment
rates were high when they first get out, that veterans may be
taking their time in getting their first jobs. But that is not
the whole story, because we still have veterans out there who
are looking for jobs, and we have veterans who are out of the
labor force, and if we are only placing six out of ten veterans
through the work force system, then we need to be looking at
what happens to the other four, and we also need to be looking
at what happens to those veterans who are out of the labor
force. Now, if they are in school or if they are in training,
that is fine. If they are struggling to find a job, then we
need to try to find them.
Our performance standards for vets are established at national
level. And individual standards are negotiated at each State.
We have established a performance accountability system. We
receive quarterly reports of performance, and certainly we
have provided those to the Committee in the past. We have
also reported the-or incorporated the common measures which
are the measures across government which-for all employment
programs, for our employment programs.
Public Law 107-288, which is the Jobs For Veterans Act,
established a first-in-line priority for veterans in America�s
work force system, first-in-line for employment assistance,
counseling, training and job placement. The Department of Labor
has embraced that; we have implemented the priority. We believe
that veteran participation rates in all of the programs that the
Department of Labor funds or partially funds are representative
of the numbers of veterans in the labor force.
I would like to say a couple words about interagency cooperation
with the Department of Veteran Affairs, Department of Defense.
Because I don�t think in the history of-certainly not since I
have been here and probably a long time before that-I don�t
think interagency cooperation has ever been better. We have
signed memorandums of understanding on TAP with the Department
of Defense, Homeland Security and VA. We have signed MOUs,
memorandums of understanding, with the Department of Veteran
Affairs, their vocational rehabilitation and employment
service. We have agreements with Department of Defense with
their employers supporting the Guard and Reserves because they
are our partners in enforcing USERRA. We have agreements with
Department of Justice and Office of Special Counsel to actively
enforce and take these issues to court if we have to. And we
have a memorandum of agreement with Walter Reed Army Medical
Center. We are starting agreements with the other medical
centers on our REAL Life Lines Programs. Now the REAL Life
Lines Program, of course, is the Department�s new program that
is dedicated to providing individualized job training,
counseling and re-employment services to our wounded
servicemembers. I might add that, just 2 months ago, we held
the first national wounded and injured veterans summit in
Alabama. We chair an interagency Committee on TAP. We also
participate in work groups with the Department of Defense on
credentialing and military spouse employment. We work with
vocational rehabilitation and employment services in three
work groups to improve accountability and improve performance
and outcomes with the chapter 31 participants. Finally, we
participate on the VA advisory Committees on homeless veterans,
minority veterans and, of course, women veterans.
The Commission recommended marketing veterans to employers, and
the President�s National Hire Veterans Committee, initially
established under the Jobs for Veterans, has done just that by
establishing a national campaign for educating employers on the
high value that veterans bring to the work force. Thousands of
senior executives and companies corporate offices, employers and
employer support organizations have been provided valuable input
or they provided valuable input. Also, they received valuable
training in how to establish strategies for reaching out and
hiring veterans. The Committee has sunset, and that is one of
the subjects of this Committee with regard to whether or not we
reestablish the President�s National Hire Veterans Committee, I
will just tell you that, so far, we have 47 Governors who have
signed proclamations for Hire Vets� first months, designating
those months, and we are now in to cosponsoring and cobranding
job fairs. And the Department of Defense is doing this as well
for disabled veterans. These job fairs are extraordinarily
important because they bring such visibility to the value that
veterans bring to the work force. And smart employers today, as
Secretary Principi said, are turning to the military for their
new hires. We are committed to reintegrating veterans into the
work force-and we do that in 3 ways. Mr. Chairman, first we do
that through the American work force system by providing the
priority of service in all the 3,400/3,500 job centers around the
country where we also have the specialized services of the
veteran employment representatives.
Secondly, we continually stand up for veterans when they don�t get
their jobs back after coming back from their active duty. We work
closely with the Department of Defense, the ESGR, or Employer
Support of the Guard and Reserve, to make sure servicemembers are
briefed before and after they leave service. We produce rules for
USERRA law, which makes that law understandable almost instantly.
And that law is working much better today.
The third and probably most important way we reintegrate veterans
is by providing quality transition assistance for separating
servicemembers of the military. We believe that TAP employment
workshop is essential for military members, both active duty and
Guard and Reserve, in order to smoothly transition them to their
civilian occupations. And we are improving that workshop. When
you look at the issues that veterans have when they come out of
the service, and this is fairly consistent; it was the same for me
as it is for veterans leaving today. It is the same for 4-star
generals as it is for young corporals. It has to do with their
ability to translate their skills, their experience and their
training on to a resume, because you just don�t write resumes in
the military. And when they do get out, it is generally the first
time they have done a resume. Military members don�t always
interview well because they don�t do that in the military either.
Their jobs are generally assigned. We are working to improve the
TAP workshop so servicemembers leave the TAP workshop with a resume
and with mock interviews so they have had that experience, and when
they go for a job, it is not the first time that they have done a
resume or an interview.
And finally, we will begin linking servicemembers in the transition
workshop with their one-stop career centers so that they know where
those centers are; they have been up on a State job board, and they
know that there is a publicly funded work force system that will
help us.
Mr. Chairman, today�s military are all volunteers. They are highly
motivated. They are highly educated. This is probably the best
military this country has ever seen. We take our responsibilities
very, very seriously to serving them. There is no more deserving
or valuable group than our Nation�s servicemembers and our veterans.
I want to thank you very much for holding this hearing, and I will
be pleased to answer your questions.
[The statement of Mr. Ciccolella appears on p. 81]
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much.
Ms. Arsht.
STATEMENT OF MS. LESLYE ARSHT
Ms. Arsht. Chairman Boozman, Congressman Herseth, Ms. Hooley, thank
you for the opportunity to be here today to discuss the Department
of Defense transition assistance program that we call TAP.
Mr. Chairman, you mentioned President Roosevelt�s famous
proclamation for this date, but an equally renowned legacy is that
the servicemembers of that generation stood up to the challenges of
that time, and their descendents are doing the same today as they
safeguard our Nation�s freedom.
As a nation, we require a great deal from our Armed Forces, and I
want to reaffirm the Department�s commitment to our separating
servicemembers.
I am impressed, as you already heard from my colleagues, by the
dedication and willingness of our Federal partners to help
provide an assortment of highly desirable transition services.
The cooperation and support we receive from the Department of
Veteran Affairs and the Department of Labor is superb. You can be
truly proud of the manner in which they, the military services as
well as private veteran service organizations, continue to
enthusiastically support our veterans. Thank you, too, for the
continued interest and support of this subcommittee.
I want to provide an update to the Department�s implementation of
the recommendations that were submitted in response to the 1999
report of the Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and
Veterans Transition Assistance. Also, since the Commission�s
recommendations were made some years ago, and the world has
changed considerably in the interim, I will also address some
other new exciting TAP initiatives.
Since the report, much has been accomplished. The Montgomery GI
Bill maximum monthly allotment for active duty servicemembers was
$528 a month in October of 1998. Today that allotment is $1,075.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
authorizes service secretaries to offer the GIB transferability
to dependents of servicemembers who reenlist or extend enlistment
in critical skill areas. The Army has implemented a pilot program
that allows transferability for the GI Bill for spouses of regular
Army enlisted personnel.
Under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005,
TRICARE eligibility was permanently extended to 180 days. The
Department supported and has implemented the Commission�s
recommendation to make the verification of military experience and
training, the VMET document, which is DD form 2586, available to
eligible members through a VMET internet site which is available
24/7. The VMET is used by servicemembers to develop resumes and
acquire college credits based on their military training and
experience. Since January 2003, over a million documents has been
provided to current and for former servicemembers. In response to
the Commission�s concerns about credentialing, it relates to
military occupational specialties and ratings, DOD and the
Department of Labor has established a credentialing working group
that is working to remove the credentialing barriers that some
veterans and transitioning members face today. The Army in 2002
created a Credentialing Opportunity On-Line or Army COOL. A
robust Web site that helps soldiers work towards civilian
credentialing related to their military occupational specialty.
This year, the Navy followed with Navy COOL.
I now want to address some of the other TAP initiatives. We
are making dramatic improvements to the Transitional Assistance
Program to better meet the needs of our Reserve components.
DOD, with the assistance of the Department of Labor and the
Veterans Affairs Department, is designing a dynamic automated Web
based system for delivery of transition assistance and related
information. This portal, which we have nicknamed Turbo TAP,
will be the backbone of an updated DOD TAP process that will
enable servicemembers to access crucial information any time,
anywhere. Phase I of Turbo TAP will be the release of a new
transition guide for the Guard and Reserve and an updated
preseparation guide for active duty members. In Phase II, we will
stand up the critical employment hub for Turbo TAP, which will
connect them to the resources they need to find their job and
their career. In subsequent phases, new elements of Turbo TAP
delivered by the Department of Defense, Department of Labor, and
DVA will be brought on line.
I want to mention a few other collaborative efforts with our
partners at Labor and VA that address some of the issues that are
of interest to this Committee. The Department of Defense and VA
established three important interagency councils. The Joint
Executive Council, Health Executive Council, and the Benefits
Executive Council, to establish a form of collaborative activities
and initiatives relating to policy, coordinated health care and
the sharing of benefits information.
We also have the TAP Steering Committee with representatives from
DOD, the military services, VA, Department of Labor, and the
Department of Homeland Security, which includes the U.S. Coast
Guard. DOD also serves as an ex-officio non-voting member of the
Department of Labor Advisory Committee on Veterans Employment
Training and Employer Outreach.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the men and women in
the military today and their families, thank you and the members
of this subcommittee for your steadfast support during these
demanding times. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Arsht appears on p. 92]
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much. I appreciate the testimony from
everyone.
We have really spent a lot of time on the TAP program in the last
2 years and have actually visited sites on various occasions, had
breakout visits with people going through the program, have sat
through the program for several hours. And I will tell you, I
was very, very impressed. I think the program is a great program.
One of the concerns that I have is where are we with funding of
TAP? Where is it available? Where is it not? What are the
problems of accessing the funds? When we were in Europe, there
was concern that there was not adequate coverage throughout the
European theater. Can you all comment and tell us, reassure us
or tell us what your needs are?
But comment about, if you have adequate resources for TAP. I
do want to compliment you. Personally, I feel like that we are
on track. I think it is a great program. I think we really are
moving in the right direction and after sitting through the
breakout sessions, listening to the people who have gone through
TAP the only criticism I would have is, I think that
servicemembers and their families throughout their career need to
be exposed to the TAP program every few years to understand what
is going on and how they need to be training themselves. I think
it is a great recruiting tool for staying in the service once they
understand their benefits that they are getting, and then allowing
them to train themselves in different areas that look like they
are going to be booming 5 years from when they get out or 10 years
or whatever their time frame may be.
Who wants to tackle that for me?
Mr. Ciccolella. I agree with you wholeheartedly on everything
you said. Let me see if I can get to all of your points. It
wouldn�t be a bad idea for servicemembers to have the opportunity
to come back to TAP, and the transition portal that we will
provide I think is a means of doing that. And we do that because
there is eligibility for people who are retired so they can come
back. But first thing we got to do is we have got to get every
servicemember to TAP before they leave the service. If they
desire to get it-it is a voluntary program-but if they desire to
go, we have have to get them to TAP and in that regard, the
Defense Department is working very, very closely with us to make
sure that if those servicemembers check that they need transition
assistance on their preseparation counseling, that their commanders
know that they are supposed to go to TAP.
You are absolutely right on the point of the value of TAP and
expanding TAP overseas. I thought this was a very visionary move
by this Committee who dictated that we do this, and it was a very
smart move.
Now what are the problems? You have been over there. We are
giving it now in 49 locations in 8 countries. We haven�t got
Spain. And as a matter of fact, I think DOD may still be doing
TAP over in Spain not DOL. So we have got to get into Spain. We
have a little problem there and a problem in Italy because the
Italians have a very stringent status of forces agreement, which
makes it difficult for Americans to work. So we do TAP in Italy
with a Federal staff member on a temporary basis. So I have a
Federal staff person who is over there on 3-month or 6-month
tours, the GS-13 who gives the TAP. In the rest of Europe and the
Far East, we are generally doing it with a very good contractor,
and that contractor is hiring military retirees, smart military
retirees who have experience in the military and civilian life
and military spouses who are absolutely superb at presenting
that TAP, as I am sure you observed.
So I think we are doing a good job. We are not getting
everybody. We still have some expansion to do. And we have to
do that consistent with the Department of Defense, and we work
on that absolutely every day and we get pretty good cooperation
from Defense.
Mr. Mansfield. I would just affirm that and make the point
that, as Secretary Ciccolella mentioned in his testimony, I
think we are working more collaboratively then we ever have in
the past. I think we have also learned with my experience in
Cochairing the JEC, the Joint Executive Committee, that we do
have an opportunity to discuss a lot more and understand a lot
more. And one of the things I understand now is that, on the
DOD side-stick with me here-on the DOD side, when you are
talking about transition, that to them it means transition out,
and they are in the business of trying to keep people. So when
we get into some of these issues, we have to be able to balance
those differing requirements and make sure that we understand
what the nuances are. But I think, even given that we are doing
a lot better job than we have in the past, and I think we are
increasing exposure and continuing to move forward. So it is
better than it was, not at a hundred percent, but moving towards,
with general agreement, on how we need to do that.
Ms. Arsht. Thank you, gentlemen. I do think we are working
really hard on this. As you all know, the pre-separation
counseling is mandatory, and everyone does take that. One of
the things that we are always looking at are total force issues.
There are differences among servicemembers about the services
that they need. And some know exactly where they will go;
they are going back to the jobs they had before. This is
particularly true of Guard and Reserve. Some already have new
jobs that they are going to. Others want to go to school.
And what we are talking about now and working in collaboration
with Department of Labor and VA and internally, is that when a
servicemember expresses a desire to participate in the
Department of Labor or VA benefits part of TAP, that the
commander knows that he or she should release them to do that.
And so we share a commitment to this, and we do think that the
transition into civilian life is very challenging for some
people, and we want to make it as easy for them as it can be.
We do think that the new portal is going to address many
issues, especially for Guard and Reserve. I mean, as I travel
around installations, Guard and Reserve members tell us they
want to go home when they are demobilized. And we think that
this online 24/7 access is going to allow them to go home and
get settled; then when they start to think about the future
they can get online with TAP, when they are ready to receive
it. By then, they are resettled and back in the embrace of
their communities and continue to give support that they want
once they have returned home.
Mr. Boozman. Very good. You know, Secretary Principi was
talking about the unemployment rate. We are all very
concerned about the unemployment rate. So if you have got a
strong program this way that everybody can participate in,
then that is one of the first tools that we have got to work
with. And not only is the unemployment rate so important
in that sense, if we can provide individuals with the ability
to support their families, take care of themselves, then the
VA has so much less a problem down the line. We will save
money. I know the President is concerned about veterans�
employment, I know the current Secretary is very concerned.
In his visit with us the Secretary stated personally that
this is something that he wants to deal with. I think this
is the basic building block that we start with. And the
good news is, from what I have seen, an excellent job is
being done. We just need to make sure that everybody is
able to participate and do it.
Ms. Herseth.
Ms. Herseth. Thank you for all of your testimony.
Mr. Ciccolella, you just mentioned in response to the
Chairman�s question, the points he was making, we really
need to try to get every servicemember through TAP. What
is the rate of participation in TAP currently? Do we have
a good way of evaluating it currently? Do you have the
current rate of participation in TAP?
Mr. Ciccolella. Under Secretary Arsht has the numbers of
the people who leave the service in her testimony. From
our point of view, it is-I can�t speak for Defense but it
is about 210, 220, 230 thousand who leave active duty every
year, and then you have the Guard and Reserve who demobilize.
I think we get about 65 percent of them. Like Under
Secretary Arsht said, some of these, especially the young
ones, and let us talk about them because they are the big
subject of the hearing-some are headed to college. Some
are going to go home and work on the farm. And some are
going to take a break after the stress of combat, while
others are going to delay finding a job. And some are going
to use their unemployment compensation while searching for
a job, and that is an important benefit. And what our
research is showing is that, if the unemployment rates of
these young veterans go down at the 9-month mark. Well,
that means that many of them, it suggests that many of them
are using that unemployment compensation to find a good job.
And that only makes sense. Because, you know, you don�t go
out and buy the first car that-when you need a car, you
shop around and you look for a car with value and the best
value for your money. These veterans are very smart, and
I think a lot of them are doing exactly that. It is a
long-winded answer, but let me sum it up by saying, the most
important thing that we can do for our servicemembers in
terms of helping them get out of the military, make that
"jump" to civilian employment as smooth as possible, is to
get them into the TAP employment workshop.
Ms. Herseth. I agree, for many of the reasons you stated
and the Chairman stated and am pleased to know, based on
some of the information we acquired when we did a field
hearing in South Dakota, that we are always looking for ways
to improve these workshops to address the needs that are
common to veterans of different ages, but who share information
throughout these workshops. I am also pleased that we
continue to look for ways to show the importance of the resume,
how to translate their skills and abilities attained during
military service to what prospective employers are looking
for and how you characterize and apply those skills.
Mr. Ciccolella. You all do that great as well as anybody in
South Dakota.
Ms. Herseth. Thank you. I appreciate that. I do have to
say one of the other things we heard in South Dakota was
perhaps different from the other branches. It has been a
trend here over the last couple of years in the Air Force
where there is an increased participation in TAP in part
because there is a reduction in force going on. When that
happens, it presents a unique opportunity to harness them and
encourage them to participate in ways that maybe we wouldn�t
see at other bases and other branches.
Mr. Ciccolella. The other thing you all are doing up there
in South Dakota, in March, I went there and talked to your
folks is they are going to start bringing employers in
to the TAP workshops. That is something that we have been
pushing. It is a little touchy sometimes with the Defense
Department. And of course every military installation, you
know, has their own security issues that they are paying
attention to. But employers are a real important addition to
TAP, I think. Because employers will tell individuals what
they are looking for. And what they are looking for is
exactly what is in that TAP class.
Ms. Herseth. Very good.
Mr. Mansfield, in your testimony, I believe right at the
beginning you explained that the VA and the National Guard
Bureau signed an agreement to train 54 National Guard State
benefits advertisers to act as points of contact for Guard
members and their families regarding VA benefits and services.
So a few questions along those lines: First, are they being
utilized? Have you been receiving any information as to how
veterans are responding to these advertisers? Do we need
more than one in each State and territory? And then Ms. Arsht,
perhaps you can talk about these advertisers, and do they
interface in any way with this Turbo TAP, the new portal, and
how is that being managed?
Mr. Mansfield. The initial idea came out of our early work
dealing with National Guard units coming home with the first
deployments and understanding right away that we had a
different situation to deal with the active-duty forces versus
the Guard or Reserve forces.
So part of the way we thought we could approach it was to make
sure we had a contact with the National Guard Bureau then with
each State bureau, with the TAGs, so that we would know in VA,
in that location, we would be notified when they knew that
somebody was coming home. I have not been at-the last one was a
vet center, two hospitals, two regional offices-anywhere in the
VA traveling around this country where I haven�t talked to VA
personnel that had been out to a National Guard unit on a
Saturday or a weeknight or a drill day talking to returning
units because we have learned that that is the way to get in
touch with them once they get back and once they get into the
drill period. The sergeant major or the officers, when
approached, will allow us, our people, to come and approach them
and be in contact; and we found out that that is the best way to
do it. The National Guard Bureau has been very cooperative in
helping us get that done and establish the contacts in making
sure we get the information.
So I think it has been very beneficial in allowing us to talk
face-to-face directly after they return and after they have been
home, and then when they are back in uniform in drill to say,
"here is what is available," "here is what you can do." And that
is both on the benefit side and also, in many cases, on the health
care side, what we call the New Hampshire model, is they actually
schedule an extra day at drill to have these folks face-to-face
with VA health care people on site. So we are trying to do new
things that deal with a new situation.
Ms. Arsht. The whole intent of this collaboration is that all of
the employers with a stake in this transition actually have a
role, an active role in it, so the Guard Bureau has been involved
with the DoD on Turbo TAP, along with these two departments
(DOL/VA). And the other thing is the content-is their content.
In other words, this is just a delivery system, but really it is
the content that is so valuable. And what we see at the end
state is a servicemember being able to put in, you know, very
minimal information to establish who they are, and then based on
their military service, those things they are eligible for become
very easy to access.
It doesn�t replace the face-to-face support that the Secretary
is speaking about. They really work in tandem. And so I think
you will see ultimately that all of these pieces have been built
to work together.
Ms. Herseth. Turbo TAP and the one-stop career centers have all
gotten information on how to help a transitioning servicemember
to access Turbo TAP.
Mr. Ciccolella. On the DOD transitional portal, we have links
that make it very easy for servicemembers to find their career
one-stop center. And they are also briefed on that center
during TAP, and as I said, we are going to try to actually
collect some information from them starting next year early in
the year, so that we actually send that information to the
career one-stop centers.
Ms. Arsht. So we are trying to build interactivity between the
three departments so all of the information dovetails for the
servicemember. From their point of view, it is quite unimportant
whether it is DOD information, VA information, or Department of
Labor information. Only that it is there. And they can access
it.
Ms. Herseth. Okay.
Just a final question and request. The question, and I am sure
you may have anticipated this, both for Mr. Mansfield and
Ms. Arsht, based on some of the questions that we�re all posing
to the first panel and our interest in the Montgomery GI Bill
and the modernization efforts, and I think you know of
Dr. Snyder, who serves on this Committee, as well as Armed
Services and his interest in this based on the hearing, the
joint hearing that we had just a few months ago, but could you
provide us today with a progress update regarding the DOD VA
task force on the total force GI Bill initiative? It was
originally due last summer, and then it would come into the
fall and then we heard at the joint hearing that it would be
some time this coming spring. Do you have any kind of update
that you can provide us with today?
Ms. Arsht. Only to say that the work continues, that it
would be premature today for us to be able to report anything
more than that.
Ms. Herseth. But you are still on track to try to get it to
us in the spring?
Mr. Mansfield. The JEC Committee meets quarterly. The last
two meetings this has been briefed to the leadership of the
JEC and then the workgroup has been sent back for a few minor
corrections. But I think we are getting pretty close to a
final product from the workgroup. But it is under the radar
scope of myself and Dr. Chu. And, again, it is one of those
where we are trying to balance some interests.
Ms. Herseth. I understand. My final request would be, as we
move into the 110th Congress-and clearly, we have made a lot of
progress with your help. Secretary Principi identified
implementing a lot of the recommendations from the Commission
report. I am hopeful that each of your agencies will be
willing to work with the subcommittee and identifying the
remaining recommendations and the best strategy of going about
implementing those, particularly if, as we have more
conversations, it is deemed important and perhaps necessary
to authorize another commission, that we finish the work of
the prior one, so hopefully, we will be able to undertake
that in the upcoming weeks.
Mr. Mansfield. One point is, my folks here mentioned that
the number that sign up for the Montgomery GI Bill is around
93 percent, and the number that uses it is now increased up
into the 70s. So that is a serious increase over a period
of 8 to 10 years. It used to be in the 47, 50, 51 percent
area. So that is a good sign.
Ms. Arsht. I actually did have the numbers; 2.9 million have
signed up since October, which is up slightly from my written
statement, and the numbers eligible are 3.8 million.
Ms. Herseth. TAP?
Ms. Arsht. I thought we were talking GI Bill.
Ms. Herseth. We are.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you. Just a couple of things real quick.
I mentioned to the former Secretary about the DVOPS/LVER
program. Is there a need to tweakit somewhat? Can you give
us any suggestions in that regard?
Mr. Ciccolella. Absolutely. I don�t think it is out of date.
The Jobs For Veterans Act, I thought, did a very good job in
terms of clarifying the rules of the DVOP and the LVER. I
think that is very, very smart the way it is laid out.
LVERs do TAP, and they do outreach to business, and so we
have got to make sure that that is what they do. And DVOP
should be focused on intensive services for disabled veterans
and veterans who have barriers to employment, and they should
be focused on job development and job accommodation. So
consistent with the Committee�s intent, when you all wrote
H.R. 3082, that is how we are gearing the training at NVTI
for those individuals.
Now what is obsolete or may be obsolete are the titles of the
DVOP and LEVR because some States don�t even use those titles.
They call them Veteran employment representatives or something
like that.
The program always needs tweaking, and it always needs
monitoring and supervision.
Mr. Boozman. Chairman Principi also recommended in his
testimony about reinstating the national-President�s National
Hire Veterans Committee. Do you all have a comment about
that? And if so, would you do it in a different way than it
was done before or-
Mr. Ciccolella. I thought the Committee was a great idea. It
served out a very important purpose. It sunsets after 3 years.
Based on this Committee�s legislative intent, which is the
functions of the Hire Vets First Committee, the President�s
Hire Vets Committee have actually been incorporated into the
advisory Committee for veterans� employment and training. And
it is now the veterans� employment and training, education and
outreach Committee.
The only thing that I would say is, as a practical matter, is
if we reinstate the President�s Hire Vets First Committee, it
would be better if that Committee also provided the advice to
the Secretary and the education and the outreach. This way,
we would not need two Committees. Because then we must support
two Committees. And these Committees are very expensive. They
do good work, don�t get me wrong. They do great work. But
administratively supporting them and the travel and all of that
sort of stuff, it is expensive and there is a little duplication
there, too. So no objection whatsoever.
Mr. Boozman. Again, I want to thank you all so much for coming
over and testifying. It was very helpful, as always. I want
to commend you, commend your staffs. It has really been an
honor working with you all. And that is one of the neat things
about being in positions, where you really do go beyond the
superficial and understand these things and deal with our staffs,
deal with your staffs, us dealing with you all is a good thing,
and like I say, we appreciate your efforts for veterans.
The other thing is that it is Pearl Harbor Day, and that is a
very special thing. My dad was 17 years old, and certainly
that disrupted his life immensely. He had just joined the
National Guard and got activated, and that generation did a
tremendous job with what they were supposed to do, being called
to duty and serving their countries along with their families,
and then as those of us get out in the course of being on
Veterans� Affairs and other Committees and seeing the tremendous
jobs that our service men and women are doing right now, I know
that generation is very proud of them. Thank you all.
The Committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:48 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]