safer state, if we moved in that direction with respect to service employees, and that's exactly what we did. >> and the cost to the state? >> i don't believe there ultimately is a cost to the state. the idea that people are going to abuse a program simply because it exists really is not supported by the data. >> thank you. thank you very governor snyder do you agree that the -- the federal government plays a major role in helping improve the economy? do the feds not help the auto industry in michigan? >> well, the auto industry was a union circumstance and that was successful, and i was asked that earlier. so i appreciate the question. what i would say is that one of the things holding back our economy very clearly, talking to any michigan employer, is the challenge of dealing with the federal deficit here. and that is an issue that needs to be resolved because as a former businessperson myself,

the number one thing you want from government is certainty and confidence that you know what you're dealing with. and if you don't know what the rules are, you're not going to take undue risk. and this is a risk sitting out there for all our employers. so i really encourage washington to address that issue, because that is holding back job creation in our state. >> absolutely. and the lack of customers is also holding back -- >> the gentle lady's time has expired. dr. heck? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thanks to both of you for being here today. i appreciate your testimony. governor snyder, i was really interested if your comments on workforce investment in your job connection program. being one of the -- having the companion bill to go along with -- the question i have is how were you able or what kind of response did you get to the idea that we were going to have to move people from the job they might have been in to the job that exists? i ask that because i represent some of nevada.

we have the dubious distinction of having the highest unemployment rate in the nation contribute largely in part to the construction jobs we've lost in the last several years. we had a field hearing on workforce investment out in las vegas. i asked one of the local analysts, economists what they thought about this 70,000 jobs, would they ever come back. his answer was no. we'll never be back to that .evel of construction in nevadao next to him on the panel was a representative of one of the builders and trades unions. i asked that gentlemen what was he doing to prepare his members for the jobs that will exist since it's apparent the jobs that did exist aren't all coming back. and the answer was, well, we just need to spend more money on inf infrastructure to put them back in the jobs that did exist. what did you do differently in michigan from moving people from what did exist to what will exist. >> i appreciate the question. i appreciate your -- along with

several other members here about the idea of putting metrics in workforce investment. a lot of it is getting the facts out to people. i'll go back to an illustration that i mentioned earlier about welder being a job that anyone, if you're a welder, you can get a job 20 minutes in michigan. how many people knew that? the other part is if you go to the average parent, average student or someone in the workforce, do they actually know what a welder does? do they actually know how much a welder makes? do they actually know where a welding program is? the answer is no. so that's why this portal concept of this web portal that mitalent.org is so powerful, because we're putting those career tools on there. then we're trying to encourage people to get the facts. i'll give you one question that's really interesting. if you go back to the auto industry illustration. that the auto industry is hiring. and they're actually concerned about having enough workforce for the future. but now they have to get over the perception that you don't want to be in the auto industry

because it goes through difficult financial times. and if you want a job in an auto plant nowadays you can't simply just say i'm coming out of high school and i'm going to work. quite often you need to go to a community college and get a couple years of technical training to work on the floor of an auto plant today. those are all kinds of things that is an ongoing process, but i'm proud to say i think we're helping lead the country in being proactive. that's why i encourage workforce development is great, but it's not enough. talent. the three "cs." connecting, collaborating and -- >> how are you moving from getting people -- >> we attacked this issue -- by the way, i agree with the governor on this point. as i have on many of the points that he's made. in our bipartisan jobs bill, we actually allocated funds to take an award winning program at one of our community colleges as

no -- training in precision manufacturing and retraining folks who may have lost their jobs at lower level manufacturing to be in precision manufacturing. with a 98% to 100% placement rate upon completion of that program. but what i found when i became governor was that that program had not been replicated in any of the other community colleges in the state. in our bipartisans job program that we passed, and i referenced it in my prior testimony, we're going to replicate that program in three additional community colleges with operating dollars. and we're going to replicate it in three of our vo tech schools in the state so we'll actually graduate people from high school or from community colleges who will be prepared to take those precision manufacturing jobs. why that connection was never made, i don't understand. but i want to make one quick point on that. one of the reasons i consolidated our community colleges of which we have 12, with our four regional universities within the state and our online university, is to make sure that our higher

educational program in the state of connecticut is more responsive to the needs of the companies, start-ups and long-term companies, that are finding it difficult to get the right talent match set. and so i think both the governor and i are working on that program, having identified it as a tremendous need. we have thousands of precision manufacturing jobs going unfilled in connecticut right now as we speak. i hope that that will not be the case in a relatively short period of time. and that's why we're putting so much emphasis on rebuilding and redirecting our community college programs. >> thank you. thank you both. i congratulate you on your innovative programs. i yield back. >> the gentleman's time has expired. mr. inahosa. >> thank you. chairman klein and congressman don payne. i am pleased to see such a distinguished first panel of governors here for our committee discussion on job creation.

today, i want to urge my colleagues to work in a bipartisan manner on a jobs agenda that creates jobs at home, educates our young adults, and reignites the american dream. i certainly support that last discussion that you had on the supporting the federal investment made in community colleges. as you know, u.s. congress has not reauthorized wea, which we passed in 1998. i think that's shameful. governor malloy, in your testimony you urge us to reauthorize it. what are your top -- this question is to governor malloy. what are your top three priorities that we in congress should look at to reform wea and improve the job training program for the next five years? >> well, let me say that i -- wea is an important program

which i think connecticut has used quite effectively. and so i'm not here to criticize the program. what i'm saying is, is we've done the right thing. we have used the dollars to train and continue to train folks to take positions that they were formally unqualified for. we have an award winning program around the employment of veterans which is a special concern, given how many veterans are returning from the two wars that we've been engaged in. i'm sure that -- that this committee is capable of making that a stronger and better law. but i, again, will reiterate that it needs to be sustained. flexibility is okay as long as flexibility is not coupled with a reduction in the funds that are made available. i think both governor -- the governor of michigan and myself are capable of directing those funds to be properly spent in our states. we both identified a common problem that we recognize. so i just would really urge the committee to get its job done.

and let's get a law renewed, and let's make sure that those dollars are flowing to our states so that we can put people back to work and train them properly. >> well, you need to know that in the 13 years that we've operated with that 1998 wea act, we saw lack of accountability and we saw that in some -- some areas, some regions of the country, the wea money they got used 60% of it for fixed costs, administration, all sorts of fixed expenses. and only 40% or less was used for training of the adults. and so i think that that needs to certainly be reformed. and that we could put a cap at, say, 40% or less for the fixed expenses and have 60% for actual training.

but you mentioned returning veterans. and i'm pleased, because i agree with you that we must do everything possible to assist these veterans in acquirie inind jobs and careers with so many of them already coming -- have come back from iraq. and then a few will start coming back from afghanistan. we really need your thoughts on how you plan to reduce the unemployment rates for veterans in your state. >> well, i'm sure this -- the governor and i both agree that this is an important societal issue. people are returning from the two wars and deployment. in many cases, with very good skill sets. but, again, those skill sets may not match what -- what is needed. so we need to make it affordable and easy for our returning service personnel to access programs in our community colleges, certificate programs

or programs that will qualify for degrees. and we actually just need to make a special effort. our labor department in our state is doing that. i've asked all my commissioners to be mindful of that. we're talking to all of our private and public universities to make sure that they understand that this is a special obligation that we owe to the people who have served us -- >> i agree with you. let me ask the question of governor snyder. you know that we're very concerned about our young -- young teenagers and young adults, particularly latinos and african-american, their unemployment rate is so very, very high. what are you doing in your state to address that problem and that group so that they can get jobs? >> that's a very timely question. because we're doing our budget message next week. and one element of that that will be included is something unemployed. because you're right on in terms of saying particularly young

people in our urban areas, we need to do something. so part of our view is, is let's put a very focused effort on that. one area in particular that i think is worth drilling down on is the concept of supply chain analysis. and that's an illustration of asking our current larger employers to say, who do you buy from? who do you do work with? there are opportunities to make things work. one illustration that we used was as simple as laundry. we have a very large health care community in metro detroit that does tons of laundry. we actually found that some of them actually have their laundry done out of state. and why aren't there opportunities for entrepreneurs to create organizations that would be very good at employing entry-level type positions to create jobs right in some of these communities. in one of those ways, again, it's not about the government, but us playing that coordinating resource to say, can we work with companies in their supply chain analysis? we've statewide called pure michigan business connect. can we put that in particularly challenged>>our suggestions are

but i want to be sure that y'all are on the same page with us. that the african-american young teenagers and young adults and the -- and the hispanic are the two that have the highest unemployment rates. and we've got to focus those efforts that you just gave us on being able to address them. >> the gentleman's time has expired. mr. ross? >> thank you, mr. chairman. speaking of economic development, i want to thank governor snyder because my hometown is lakeland, florida, the spring training home of the detroit tigers for the last 75 years. we're at that time of year now where your constituency is migrating to my area for economic development purposes and i thank you for that. to both governors, the nlrb decision, especially health care case, allows for the creation of many unions. of like kind now unionize as well as the nlrb's promulgation of rules that expedite the voting for unions

from 90 days to 14e significant for organized labor. and i thinkant pacts on job creators. my question to both governors, i'll start off with you, dr. snyder, is do you support these efforts by nlrb and how will they, if they efforts as a job >> one of the challenges much like some of the other issues, i view that as just creating divisiveness. you're going to create environments where people are at conflict. we shouldn't be wasting time on things where we're going to get into conflict. we have too many important issues to solve. we waste way too much time on arguing about things rather than finding common ground and solving problems. >> would you see any reason to change the status quo, then? >> no. my view is let's find areas where we agree on. if you listen to the testimony here, you can hear about infrastructure issues, so many . showing results. let's find, again, relentless positive action is my motto. let's find common ground solutions where we agree, solve our problems, show results and

we'll find we're closer together and we've got a lot of things to work on before we get into fights. >> governor malloy? >> i just want to say that i believe the right to unionize is actually guaranteed by our constitution. and taking steps to allow individuals to come together for the purposes of collective bargaining should not be seen as an evil. just as i would not argue -- >> agree. but changing the status quo, would that not negatively impact your efforts as a job creator? >> if you look at the history of this discussion, there was a movement around car check, which was not successful. car check came about because of the frustration of folks who would want to become organized, that once they got to the point where an election was to be held, there was no timeliness in the -- in the holding of that election or of that vote. so anything that would speed the vote taking place, i think, actually works to the favor of the -- of the work environment. you get a yes or a no. >> so you have no problem with

expediting it to 14 days for union elections? >> no. i think an expedited process, the exact time of which i think could be open for -- >> you don't feel that would impact your -- as a job creator? >> the gentleman from south carolina talked about the right to work state -- or movement. quite frankly, connecticut's unemployment rate as i sit here today is lower than south carolina's. and we have a more unionized workforce. so i think that people will make an argument around their belief, but they're not always substantiated by the facts. >> both governors, you have the requirement for a balanced budget, don't you? in michigan and in connecticut? >> all states do. >> yeah. that's not good enough, though, if you really look -- >> i agree with you. something else we have on the federal level, state level and local levels, of course, is our pensions. and my question, you addressed this, governor malloy, in your opening statement, i appreciate that, with making reforms.

is your benefits plan in -- >> defined benefits plan. >> is that something you think needs to be changed to a defined contribution plan so that there is an opportunity to make sure it's fully funded? >> no. my approach is different. if a state government had honored its commitment and properly funded the program over a period of time, i would not have inherited a program that was -- >> the fact that they cannot fund it, is that not indicative of the fact that it was not an appropriate measure that the state should have taken and now should renegotiate because how else are you going to fund these? >> no. i fundamentally disagree that defined benefit programs are by definition an evil. >> i never said it was an evil. i'm just saying it is a burden on your state. in terms of funding. >> they do require discipline. and in the absence of that discipline, for instance, one of my predecessors had negotiated language that did not require the pension plan to be funded on

true actuarial basis. i pointed out we would have had a $4.4 billion balloon payment on that pensiony one of my predecessors. obviously that is wrong. >> quick question before i go. i see my time's running out. i firmly believe in states' rights. i think that's very important. there is a measure recommended by the president's debt commission, the simpson/bowles commission which eliminates all corporate tax loopholes and would reduce the corporate tax rate flat to 20%. i believe something like that would not only be an incentive for economic development within our country but it would allow states the leverage to use tax policy to compete with other states for economic development. how do you both feel about that? >> the gentleman's time has expired. i'm sorry. mr. tierney. >> thank you, as you know the vall patrick was invited today to testify. i would submit his written testimony be allowed into the

record. >> without objection. >> thank you very much. governor snyder in particular, i note in governor patrick's written testimony here he's quite proud of the fact massachusetts made certain gains as you are with the state of michigan. he made a quote growth comes from investment, not cuts, government must do its part to help people and businesses help themselves. he goes on to talk about massachusetts was 47th in job creation in 2006. now even during the last couple years of recession has gone to fifth on that. he's proud thatoverall achievement in both math and science and that we lead the nation in massachusetts in health care coverage, having covered over 98% of our people on that basis. that he's closed his budget gap, eliminated a structural problems on deficit on that and has a higher bond rating than they've ever had in massachusetts on their own. he talks about adding 45,600 private sector jobs in massachusetts. and that the

drop ped 8.5% to 6.8% on stratey building on the strategy buildi reforms. he talked about the recovery act allowing him to maintain his commitment to education, his commitment to innovation where he put a billion dollars in life sciences and quarter of a billion dollars into clean energy, was able to work in applied research issues on that. i noticed in looking at michigan.gov, 54,000 jobs were created and you had actually back in may of last year made note of the serious investment in your rail in michigan. and it has the ability to enhance our economy, environment, overall quality of life and an investment of that

magnitude you were able to say that it was critical to michigan's resident's recovery. do you agree with that still? >> yeah. i gave a message calling for $1.4 billion of investment in transportation infrastructure in our state. it's a difficult economic environment. a lot of our citizens don't believe we've demonstrated best practice in how to deploy those dollars. one of the things that goes along with that is being more prudent in that we are being more accountable and transparent in those features but they go together. >> on the recovery act, $1.35 billion in advance battery grants and now michigan claims to be the leader in automotive batteries on that. does that still hold true? >> what i would say on the battery credit is that it was done when i got there. i'm not a believe in picking winners or losers or picking tax

credits in particular. we redid our tax system and wiped out all tax credits and eliminated a tax on unincorporated entities and my belief is that will be a better job creator than having the michigan business tax which was the dumbest tax in the united states. >> the recovery act money that you put towards the advanced battery act is that still in use? >> that's in use. again, they are there. i hope they succeed. one thing when i look at the budget for this year and the next several years, i started minus $500 million in the hole. >> how many teachers do you think you were able to retain on the payroll in the various cities and towns as a result of the recovery act? >> i view that as speculation because where i felt about the dollars in many respects is too

often we use that for operating costs as opposed to good capital investment that we at the same time changed our cost structures and actually hope provide better education. >> the prior administration used $200 million of our own money to cover a cut to local governments in support of local education -- education pre-k through the state in the state of connecticut. that $270 million, if i had not covered that in reworking the budget in addressing $300 billion deficit, would have led to the loss of thousands and thousands of jobs for teachers, administrators, and professionals in our school

system. our school systems. so let me assure you it was my highest priority to make sure that we bridge that gap that had occurred, which is another way of saying they used our money to keep teachers employed. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you for holding this hearing. and thank you both for being here. governor snyder, i certainly share your frustration with the highly skilled international students. do the creativity and innovation that we need in those foreign countries than remain here and i hope that we will be able to -- congress will put aside the partisanship and work out a way to keep them here. but i'm also very concerned about our students and why they weren't meeting the requirements that we think they should.

particularly, i think that most of our colleagues and i really think that the stem education is really important and we need to find a way to get more students interested in that and i was in the -- one of the studies that they -- gathering storm that the national academy put out, saying that we need to have the creativity and innovation if we're going to be competitive in the global economy. and i don't think we are when we see finland as the number one school in that area and i think the united states ranks 24th or 28th. i forget. but it's very low. we need to do something about that. and you talked about the significant lack of college students in michigan. why do you think that has

happened? >> that comes from student growth and we did education reform this last year on a significant basis because what needed to be done and a remedial class qualified to take an entry level class. that's a travesty and a lot of it, if you look at it, there's not a lot of emphasis on student growth and it's not about standized tests. my view is that web measure to see that each and every student is getting one year's of education each and every year and giving some other tools with connecting, about showing them

where the careers actually are because most kids think that lawyer, teacher, nurse, how many people think about being a marketer or programmer where the jobs are? that's where we need to collaborate together. that's where i talk about the three c's. >> when do you start that? >>. >> i call it p-20. we have developed barriers to make it difficult for the kids to go through the system that are artificial constructs of money or old institutions and lack of innovation and we create a seamless system so that any

time, any way you get education. cyber schooling, in particular, married with traditional education done right is a huge opportunity. >> i would agree with the governor and that's exactly what we're doing in connecticut as i appear before you. we need a seamless system. we need to make it easy for people to acquire our skill sets to succeed. i do want to join your comments with respect to the ability to retain talent that we're training in this country. it really is a traf jess stee that we're not retaining that talent once we've educated it here and have people who express a desire to remain here and be part of filling a void that currently exists. i do want to also say that i think we need to speak to our young people differently about what it takes to be successful in the world. we have precision manufacturing jobs in both of our states that pay in excess of $100,000 and yet we're unable to pay those. we have children who say they

want to be a pilot some day but don't explain to them that that's going to require stemmed skills. we need to have a kfrg from our early moments but certainly from the time a child arrives in our school system and we need to help direct those young people to areas that are going to lead to full employment. we have not done that and that's why we have a structural deficit with respect to the skill set or talent set necessary to match the employment needs that our country currently has. we can't do that rapidly enough to fill that void. it's one of the reasons that we are in fact giving a credit to new hires or foreign new hires because we as a state understand that not having done a good job in training a replacement workforce, it's in our best interest to subsidize an employer being engaged in that training. >> thank you both. >> the gentle lady's time has