The Most Influential Jobs Bill You’ve Never Heard Of

Could an overhaul of the Workforce Investment Act be a key to solving unemployment?

OAKLAND, CA - AUGUST 05: Job seeker Maurice Jones looks through job listings at Eastbay Works Oakland One-Stop Career Center August 5, 2010 in Oakland, California. U.S. jobless claims unexpectedly rose by 19,000 new claims for the week ending on July 31. 
Getty Images
Fawn Johnson
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Fawn Johnson
May 15, 2014, 5:01 p.m.

It’s the most in­flu­en­tial jobs bill you’ve nev­er heard of, and this sum­mer it might be up­dated for the first time in 14 years.

When the Work­force In­vest­ment Act was signed by Pres­id­ent Clin­ton in 1998, the idea was to con­sol­id­ate what had typ­ic­ally been sep­ar­ate state of­fices — the un­em­ploy­ment of­fice, the job-list­ings of­fice, the train­ing-ser­vices of­fice, some­times even the wel­fare of­fice — in­to One-Stop Ca­reer Cen­ters, in or­der to help more Amer­ic­ans con­nect with em­ploy­ers’ needs. But Con­gress has ig­nored the law since it went in­to ef­fect in 2000, and law­makers and ad­voc­ates say it badly needs a face-lift. Its fo­cus on short-term train­ing and rap­id ree­m­ploy­ment for laid-off work­ers is out­dated, ac­cord­ing to the Na­tion­al Skills Co­ali­tion, a job-train­ing ad­vocacy group.

The act grew out of a de­bate in the mid-1990s. After Clin­ton signed the wel­fare-re­form law that for the first time linked wel­fare be­ne­fits to jobs and train­ing, poli­cy­makers turned a crit­ic­al eye to­ward ex­ist­ing gov­ern­ment train­ing pro­grams and found them dis­con­nec­ted from the job mar­ket. The Work­force In­vest­ment Act sought to get busi­nesses more in­volved in the sys­tem. It also im­posed re­port­ing re­quire­ments on the One-Stop Ca­reer Cen­ters, man­dat­ing that they track em­ploy­ment out­comes for the people they served — but not wheth­er those re­ceiv­ing job train­ing were also tak­ing col­lege classes or pur­su­ing a cer­ti­fic­ate, for ex­ample. Thus, it pri­or­it­ized im­me­di­ate em­ploy­ment over in­vest­ments in long-term job-read­i­ness.

Con­gres­sion­al staffers say that the law’s em­phas­is on em­ploy­ment out­comes also para­dox­ic­ally made it harder for the One-Stop Ca­reer Cen­ters to provide ser­vices to the very people it was in­ten­ded to help, such as low-in­come youth, or adults who need re­medi­al school­work or help with child care. Dir­ect­ing a self-suf­fi­cient cli­ent to a job-list­ing kiosk, avail­able at all One-Stops is, after all, a more ef­fi­cient route to suc­cess than provid­ing in­di­vidu­al at­ten­tion or in­tens­ive job train­ing to a cli­ent who is es­pe­cially hard to em­ploy.

Law­makers want to clear up these prob­lems. Re­pub­lic­ans and Demo­crats in both the House and the Sen­ate want the new Work­force In­vest­ment Act to en­cour­age every One-Stop Ca­reer Cen­ter to of­fer more types of train­ing to more cli­ents. What’s more, both the House and Sen­ate bills say cli­ents should be get­ting some sort of de­gree or cer­ti­fic­ate, and that it’s OK if that pro­cess takes a few years. Un­der the pro­posed changes, that wouldn’t count against a One-Stop’s year-end tally of cli­ents and their em­ploy­ment out­comes.

There are dis­agree­ments between the two cham­bers. The House passed its ver­sion of the le­gis­la­tion last year along party lines, with only two Demo­crats vot­ing in fa­vor of it; Demo­crats say Re­pub­lic­ans gut­ted the law. A more bi­par­tis­an ef­fort passed the Sen­ate Health, Edu­ca­tion, Labor, and Pen­sions Com­mit­tee last sum­mer on an 18-3 vote. While the House bill com­bines 35 dif­fer­ent job-train­ing pro­grams in­to one and gives states money in the form of block grants, the Sen­ate ver­sion re­tains most of the ori­gin­al law’s pro­grams, con­sol­id­at­ing only five.

At first glance, dif­fer­ences seem ir­re­con­cil­able, but aides say the ne­go­ti­at­ors, in­clud­ing Sen. Patty Mur­ray, D-Wash., and Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., are ac­tu­ally pretty close on many thorny is­sues. They all ac­know­ledge that some of the cur­rent law’s 47 sep­ar­ate pro­grams will have to go. Many of the pro­grams are tailored to serve spe­cif­ic pop­u­la­tions — youth, laid-off work­ers, dis­abled job seekers, vet­er­ans — but the Gov­ern­ment Ac­count­ab­il­ity Of­fice says they are overly du­plic­at­ive. The fi­nal deal won’t con­sol­id­ate all the pro­grams in­to to a single block grant, but the two sides can meet in the middle, aides say.

If ne­go­ti­at­ors are able to reach a deal in the next sev­er­al weeks, their com­prom­ise could be on the Sen­ate floor some­time this sum­mer. With House mem­bers in­volved in the talks now, that agree­ment should, in the­ory, eas­ily pass the House.

It’s a tall or­der, but it’s not im­possible. Mur­ray has been work­ing on the bill and re­lated is­sues for years. Re­pub­lic­ans lately have been talk­ing about the need to up­date job-train­ing pro­grams. In Janu­ary, one of the ne­go­ti­at­ors, Sen. Lamar Al­ex­an­der, R-Tenn., said the Sen­ate should vote on a job-train­ing bill dur­ing the de­bate on un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits. House Speak­er John Boehner touted the House-passed job-train­ing bill last month in a weekly ra­dio ad­dress, chas­tising the Sen­ate for not tak­ing up the is­sue.

The ne­go­ti­at­ors are hop­ing to provide law­makers with something to vote on to back up their pub­lic state­ments. But it has to be just the right bill. Demo­crats will run in­to prob­lems if they go too far in curb­ing the in­di­vidu­al pro­grams. Ad­vocacy groups will not eas­ily let go of money set aside for spe­cif­ic groups of job-seekers, es­pe­cially when they don’t trust that the states will serve those people on their own.

The House bill is “totally un­ac­cept­able,” says Chan­elle Hardy, ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the Na­tion­al Urb­an League’s Wash­ing­ton bur­eau. The Urb­an League sup­ports the Sen­ate ef­fort be­cause it dir­ects fed­er­al dol­lars to pro­grams that help young people who have dropped out of high school, or have been in­volved in the crim­in­al-justice sys­tem, get trained and find jobs.

That lan­guage isn’t in the House bill, which makes the le­gis­la­tion a non­starter for the Urb­an League. “A single work­force in­vest­ment fund block grant would totally un­der­mine and dis­mantle our na­tion’s work­force-de­vel­op­ment sys­tem’s re­sponse to the very pop­u­la­tion of adults and youth most in need of its ser­vices,” Hardy says.

Strong state­ments like that are go­ing to have to be tempered for a new law to make it to Pres­id­ent Obama’s desk. But if Re­pub­lic­ans and Demo­crats could agree on a budget, maybe they can do this too.

This art­icle is part of The Next Amer­ica pro­ject. 

What We're Following See More »
Bill Murray Crashes White House Briefing Room
5 hours ago

In town to receive the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor at the Kennedy Center, Bill Murray casually strolled into the White House Briefing Room this afternoon. A spokesman said he was at the executive mansion for a chat with President Obama, his fellow Chicagoan.

CFPB Decision May Reverberate to Other Agencies
8 hours ago

"A federal appeals court's decision that declared the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau an arm of the White House relies on a novel interpretation of the constitution's separation of powers clause that could have broader effects on how other regulators" like the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

Morning Consult Poll: Clinton Decisively Won Debate
8 hours ago

"According to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, the first national post-debate survey, 43 percent of registered voters said the Democratic candidate won, compared with 26 percent who opted for the Republican Party’s standard bearer. Her 6-point lead over Trump among likely voters is unchanged from our previous survey: Clinton still leads Trump 42 percent to 36 percent in the race for the White House, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson taking 9 percent of the vote."

Twitter Bots Dominated First Debate
9 hours ago

Twitter bots, "automated social media accounts that interact with other users," accounted for a large part of the online discussion during the first presidential debate. Bots made up 22 percent of conversation about Hillary Clinton on the social media platform, and a whopping one third of Twitter conversation about Donald Trump.

Center for Public Integrity to Spin Off Journalism Arm
9 hours ago

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, the nonprofit that published the Panama Papers earlier this year, is being spun off from its parent organization, the Center for Public Integrity. According to a statement, "CPI’s Board of Directors has decided that enabling the ICIJ to chart its own course will help both journalistic teams build on the massive impact they have had as one organization."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.