our experience is that these returning military become solid students and campus leaders. we support the administration's efforts to ensure that service members and veterans can make the best-informed choices. thank you for the opportunity to speak about this legislation. >> thank you. i will begin the questions. if you can describe to us, the average student veteran at iu. what's their experience like in transitioning into college compared to an average 18-year-old freshman coming into school. >> i would be hard pressed to define an average student veteran. every one is so unique in their situation and in their needs and experiences that impacted them as they now transition into the civilian life.

we really think of them across an entire spectrum of experiences. as they come to school, they have a greater focus on education and value on education than the average traditional 18-year-old program student might have. they tend to be interested in their success and finances. when they know they need it, they come from a tradition where that is not necessarily looked on as being a positive value to reach out and ask for help. we work hard to try to provide that assistance to those who need it and never assume that those who are doing fine are somehow just concealing a need that we are not aware of. it runs the gambit of student

who is walk in once and sign up for classes and they are good to go to someone who spends most of three days a week in the office because they have a need to reconnect with other veterans because they have a need to seek out support services or feel lost in a school of 42,000 students. i'm afraid that's not a good answer other than to say there is not an average one out there and unique and special and different. >> that's probably the case for every individual. they are looking for something different in one way or the other. mr. gunderson, given all of the variables in student demographics, the availability of jobs and is it reasonable to use data such as salaries to judge the quality of a school's education and could you discuss a little bit about the variables and what you see and also follow-up a bit on the question that asked her as well.

>> when you asked the first panel that question, i put down notes of things they think would be helpful to the typical veteran who is trying to make a decision. one is placement in employment. [ no audio ] >> the second would be a percent of graduates that way you will

look at -- [inaudible]. for example, i had mentioned to you earlier they they are pretty much constant. let's look at an academic schedule and flexibility. they are working hard. >> thank you. this is for anyone on the panel. college data, the education that we talked about earlier, how

many more will the executive orders require and what would the data print out. it's a little bit. to the extent will this order create for school. is that information valuable for students to look? >> well, there is an enormous amount of data and also you look at the voluntary system of accountability and many institutions participate in. you will find that there is a lost really useful and for anyone, i think the issue that i heard discuss side in part the availability of that information, but also the issue

of promoting the systems of accountability for veterans so that it's more relative. i think that it's an art. >> not necessarily how many items are added, but how you present that to veterans is soundings like is important. >> thank you. >> dr. gibraltar, you self identified as working as a rural university. to mr. stutsman and i, rural america is not a policy. it's where we are from. >> yes. >> rural america has a disproportionate contribution to the defense of this country. when we have young men and women returning, looking for educational opportunities, we have a moral obligation to reward that sacrifice by giving them an educational experience that moves them on the way to

fulfilling their career in educational goals. i don't think you disagree with that. >> i absolutely agree. >> one of the statements confused me where you said there is no requirement for students to identify themselves as veterans. >> right. >> yet we are talking about funding from the gi bill and military tuition assistance benefits. how can colleges and universities not identify that that is a veteran when they are receiving the benefits? >> think you are talking about two different issues. i think where we struggle is that there students who are on the university campuses who don't tell us or indicate in any way that they are veterans. they don't want themselves to be known. that is what i'm talking about. i am not talking about the student who is are there for also receiving benefits. we do know about it. >> you raised a point that i

alluded to in my opening remarks. that is everybody -- if you asked 100% of the population whether they think there is too much government red tape, you will get 100% yes. to the average person, the average business, that's a two-fold problem. one is the conduct that's being regulate and whether it should be regulated in the first place and the other is if that regulation or the documents that communicate with people about their expected behavior are written so people waste their time trying to understand what's expected of them. i know that you are all intelligent, highly educated people, but if you are telling us that you are dealing with federal regulations that are incomprehensive to you, we have a big problem. that's why i introduced the plain language in government

regulations bill to get to the root cause of what we are talking about. you mentioned that thankfully in your opening comments, but this gets to the greater problem. when you have turbo tax that can simplify the time it takes the average veteran college student to do their tax return and you give them the same forms and the booklet that is 150 pages long, we have a lot to learn about how we process our information and get you the data you need in the least inconvenient format possible. that's what frustrates me. how do we get that? >> i think the conversations need to condition and think we need to be involved in and continue to be involved and would use as a rrchs for the accountability that initially

colleges and universities did not have to participate in, but many chose to. if you look at that, you will see at least from my view a much more easily understandable interface that students can get information about acceptance rates and graduation roughts and the percentage of students that get financial aid. any number of data points. >> welcome home. i would like to remind you that iowa used to be part of wisconsin territory, but we beat you into the united states by two years. i won't get into that. i wasn't clear from your testimony whether your concerns are that on behalf of your member institutions, you are opposed to the executive order in itself or you are opposed to the implementation of the executive order. >> great question because i'm not sure we are a posed to

either. i was disappointed that an executive order would reach consensus. what i lifted up is that the executive order if it is developed with all of us and all of you in working out the kirchgs and the issues that need to be defined, this could be good. we have got to deal with those two big issues. a complaint process and a calculation of the information for the veteran on graduation and academic achievement in ways it works for the veteran and it is higher education. if we do that together, this is a win-win. if we don't, it's a disaster for everybody. the veterans and the schools and you trying to get the information. the verdict on whether it's good or bad is yet to be determined. we only have 60 days left before the window is to be concluded and this goes into effect. like i said, i talked to my colleagues at the american

council on ace on monday. we promised we will be asked. we haven't been asked and we volunteered to convene on the higher ed groups. no one has been asked to work out the issues. >> one of the things that all of us would tell you is that an executive order lasts only as long as the person who signs it is in office as a practical matter. the chairman and i and other members of the subcommittee are engaged because we know that ultimately there has to be a legislative solution that takes into account the best interest of the veterans and the people receiving the funds and the u.s. taxpayers and the institutions that have to administer them. we look forward to working with you and encourage you to engage with the veteran service organizations who testified and members of congress and with that, i yield back. >> thank you. >> thank all of you for your

testimony and expertise in helping you understand this. i am proud of the work we did on the post 9/11 gi bill. it is corely needed. it opened up and has opened up countless opportunities. we have a couple major requirements in this committee, making sure that we provide all of the earned benefits that our warriors deserve. at the same time making sure that as stuarts of the taxpayer dollars we get them there. i see that similar mission. you are trying to deliver and make the opportunities available. i want to be clear that as we do things that we are making sure we are not contracting the opportunities that the gi bill offers and we are not making it more difficult for the bulk of our warriors to get the benefits because of a few bad actors in this. would you all characterize it as a few bad actors or is this a

problem that truly did need an executive order? anybody want to try at that 1 sn go ahead. >> t >> the politically correct thing to say is bad apples. the data proves otherwise. a quarter of pell grant dollars and accounting for half of all student loan defaults and capturing 50% of the dod tuition assistance and 37% of all the benefits. the numbers, you can get the plural of anecdote is not data. the data speak to a systemic issue. >> can i respond to that? >> sure. >> i appreciate that. i respect everybody's right to disagree with the concept of private sector education. i think that we ought to understand exactly who private sector colleges and universities

happen to serve in america today. what would happen if they didn't exist. this tends to be career-oriented education. the reality is that 94% of all the student who is attend private sector colleges and universities are eligible for title four student financial aid assistance. we ought to commend the schools that would not have access to post secondary education and the skills and the jobs and the incomes and the middle class families they are able to obtain through that. when i hear people who criticize us because we serve a disproportionate number of veterans or active duty military, you have to mixed up. you ought to comment the schools for the design and delivery of academic programs that serve the needs of today's veteran. don't blame the schools. congratulate them in that regard. >> do you think this was a chain saw then instead of a scalpel

that should have been used? you had something interesting in your testimony. you talked about the va having the authority to prohibit the enrollment into poor-performing schools and how the va could join in agreement with ftc to do things here. have they done those things? >> no. that's my frustration. i spent 16 years promoting all of higher ed. i am a big fan and the private sector and everybody. there is so much out there today in terms of regulatory authority to go after the bad conduct that all we ask is use your present authority and go after that school and you will never hear me or my association here defending one bad apple engaged in misconduct of a veteran or any other student. let's not indict all of higher ed or even just the private sector colleges in universities for the misconduct of one

school. >> several of the rest of you hit on this and i don't say this facetiously in any way. i am the staunchest supporter, but also the harsh est critic. the prescriptions for the better way of doing this is communication and getting data from the va. good luck with that. i say that as i said, not facetiously. they do a lot and a lot of things that we put on them with privacy data and concerns about that. i know that, but i couldn't agree with you more. we have to do better at how we get the data and how we process it. how do we engage it better? what are your solutions on this or how do we get the communication working better? this is a sticky point for us across a lot of issues. you mentioned it also. >> i have been involved in the committee having conversations

with the va and one of the things we continually brought up is that if we can simply have a release that a veteran would sign that would allow people at the institution to talk to them. it's a pretty simple concept. we do have people at the institutions that can talk to them, but they are usually in margaret's role. it's not people in my area where we do the billing and all of those types of processing. we will call up and try to get questions answered for the veterans and we are immediately shut down. we have been trying to work with them to have a very simple form that a veteran can sign. we fax it to them and you can create an online form. >> what was the feedback on that. i can tell you, i think this is a fundamental reform in the processing of benefits and burial claims and others. my service officers don't have the ability of what you are asking for. these are licensed and bonded folks who say that we are going

to protect this data and they can't get it. have they been responsive to you? >> in the conversations we had, they continued to say they have to have conversations internally. we have been asking for well over 24 months. that's just an example of how we could help the veterans. >> we can go down the line and i have been asking for six years. i think that's a problem and am troubled by this. . the nature of some of these folks, it appalls all the veterans and it's a disservice and despicable and all that, but i understand where you are coming from and i am troubled by the idea of an executive order without the input and the last time many of you were here testifying, there was a good faith effort to include you. i don't think we will get at the heart of this if we don't include everyone who is processing the data and going up. also i think he is right. i can't ignore the data that

shows this and we need to hammer down on this. there is a lot of money and those things, but how we get to that point of communication is still troubling me. i went over my time and i yield back to the chairman. >> that's not a problem. did you have a comment that you wanted to make? >> i wanted to respond a little bit more to the question. to re more to the question. it's been baffling to school certifying officials that we can get full eligibility for almost every other chapter except be post- 9/11 gi bill. it appears it's a combination of perhaps miss place e ed privacy concerns and reputations on i.t. systems that have other priorities now. this needs to be priority or we'll not be able to do many of

the things and provide the services that we do on our campuses. thank you. >> i've got a couple other questions. it sounds like they are having a lot of success. is there something that they are doing differently that we should be paying attention to and also i think every one of us agree that there are bad apples. do we have the tools to deal with that now? >> one of the things i enjoy is a new news release that is going after our schools. now that they're going after the schools but the tools are already in place.

what they have done is go above and beyond the federal and the state minimums to accomplish a voluntary set of best practices. if ecpi were sitting here today rather than steve gunderson they would tell you when we're eng e engaged in on site education of veteran, all we need to do is screw up once and that commander will never again direct any of us enlistees to our school. >> when you say if a school is being disciplined or going after a school, what practices are they performing that requires them to discipline or to investigate? >> i think the biggest allegation against our sector over the last four years has been misrepresentation. as i tried to show in my written testimony and much more quickly in my oral testimony is that

there is between the accrediting standards and the v.a. and the department of education, all of them prohibit misrepresentation in advertising or sales. there's a lot of different avenues to go after that particular enforcement. that's number one. number two in why we support counselling is because i think if the veterans that i've talked to at these schools tell you they have a complaint, it is that they don't know the right questions to ask at the beginning. they will tell you as they have told me personally what i thought it was going to cost to get a degree and what it really cost is different because there was an annual increase in tuition costs or because the original tuition and books cost only covered online books and if

you want to buy hard copy book, it's questioning like that that the council becomes the key part of equipping the veteran to what they are pursuing. if you are nationally accredited, you probably don't have a good shot of getting transferability to accreditation. if it's not lifted up to that veteran, i'm not sure when i was enrolling that i would have had any idea to ask about national versus regional versus program specific accreditation and what its impact would be. those are the things i think we all want. >> any further questions? >> i want to follow up on a comment that you made in direct response to what we've been talking about. you talked about the challenge of eliminating waste fraud and abuse, and yet the fact there were burdensome regulations that

were intended to attack that very problem and yet we're not having the desired results of providing accountability and due process and enforcement that then changes behavior. what can we do to change that system? >> greater focus on outcomes. i think the ordinary system, i think you're approach to the regulatory government is right on the money. the ordinary citizen unders intuitively that the taxpayers of this country as a moral obligation and recognition of service and service members have providing for educational benefits. the question should not be accreditation, and a stack of papers that are skillful law firm can fill out. the question is did this veteran

leave this place better off or worse off. i think this committee can make tremendous strides but focusing on that bottom line question, are these billions of dollars being spent improving the lives of veterans or being left off despite the expenditure of funds and the massive amount of pap paperwork that legitimate institutions are dealing with because we have a problem we don't want to stare in the face. with regard to the executive order, it's very much that challenge. the executive order is an attempt at taking the right steps. the problem is we have easier ways of getting there. it requires legislation. it requires test of market viability. it requires test of good outcomes for the veterans. >> we talked to a lot of veterans and specifically on

this committee how you transition out of military into a civilian work force or into a civilian education environment. a lot of the veterans we talked to who go through those programs talk about what we commonly refer to as death by powerpoint. these are men and women who have given so much and sacrificed so much and burdened with that transition and want to get it behind them and move on with their lives and we were there at the joint hearing on this and i sat there and listened to this. holly petraeus was one of witnesses testifying. i said if you're concerned about making sure somebody has access to an 800 must remember or website or a facebook page that they can access, we put that on a refrigerator magnet because

that's what we do when we want to know where to find something. senator rockerfeller seem intrigued by that concept. i don't know that he has a lot of refrigerator magnets. it's one of those simple things that can have far ranging benefits to people that are so burdened with information that they don't know where to start to get the answers to the questions they have. i think sometimes we have well-meaning people who are highly educated that want to do the right thing and want to take into account every potential contingency and forget the underlying objective of the original program. i appreciate all you have being here today and thank the chairman for holding this event. >> thank you to all you have. i appreciate you being here and your information has been very valuable. we do have votes folks at 5:00.

we'll excuse you and bring the final panel. i'd like to remind everyone that the saa's are critical in improving gi benefits. welcome to the subcommittee. we thank you for your years of dedicated to our country in the u.s. air force as well. we'll recognize you for five minutes