Transcripts For CSPAN3 Eugene Scalia Confirmation Hearing 20240714

Good morning. Good morning. The committee will come to order. Today were considering the nomination of Eugene Scalia. Let me say before i begin my Opening Statement that we welcome the secretary, good to see you. And we welcome mr. Scalias family. Well give him a chance to introduce all of them a little later. Theres so many of them and i wont the scalias are a productive family, apparently, so we wont come off any of your allotted time for your statement and i would say to the family members that the confirmation hearings arent necessarily a family exercise. I was before this committee myself to be nominated for education secretary and was grilled pretty heavily, i thought, with my family sitting right behind me. I was accustomed to it, but they werent. But they got over it before very long. We welcome you here and were glad youre here. Yesterday i received a letter from senator murray asking me to delays todays hearings. I think the Committee Members know, i do my best to do what senator murray suggests that i do. We work cooperatively even when we disagree. But im not going to agree to that and i want to carefully explain why. Weve already delayed the hearing one week at senator murrays request and let me go over the nomination process just briefly. On july 18, two months ago, President Trump said he would in a moment Eugene Scalia as the United States secretary of labor. And then on august 27th, the Committee Received mr. Scalias ethics paperwork from the government including his purpose Financial Disclosures and based on these documents, it was determination he was compliant. Then on the same day, three weeks ago, august 27, the Committee Also received his committee paperwork which is extensive and is additional background information. All of that required paperwork has been before the committee for 23 days, more than three weeks. And since that day, august 27, mr. Scalia has offered to meet with every member of this committee and has met with most of us. Now to make sure im being exactly fair in the way i schedule these confirmation hearings, i check closely to compare how the committee handled president obamas nominations and compared them with the way we handle President Trumps. Lets take the example of tom perez who was president obamas second secretary of labor. The Committee Received the last of mr. Perezs paperwork ten days before his hearing or take the example of john king, president obamas second secretary of education, the Committee Received the last of mr. Kings paperwork six days before his hearings. By comparison, mr. Scalia had all of his paperwork in 23 days before the hearing. And i also think its reasonable to vote on mr. Scalia next tuesday. This has been a thorough process. Senators have known for two months that the president has selected, nominated mr. Scalia. As of today, weve had all of his paperwork for 23 days. Today senators will have the opportunity to have two rounds of questions. Any senator should be able to ask any additional question that a senator wishes to ask, that a senator did not ask when that person met personally with mr. Scalia. And if senators still have questions, they can submit those by 5 00 p. M. Tomorrow and mr. Scalia will answer them. I imagine the democrats on this committee disagree with mr. Scalia. And i disagreed with john king on many education matters. But when president obamas education secretary stepped down in his last year of office, i went to the president and i said, mr. President , i think we need to have a confirmed Senate Nominee in an important position like u. S. Education secretary. If you will please in a moment john king with whom i disagree, i said if youll in a moment him, even though we disagree, well consider and confirm him promptly. And we did. Within 32 days after president obama nominated john king and within the senate had confirmed him. I also voted, by the way, for cloture on the senate floor for both of these nominees. I did this because i believe its important that we have a confirmed and accountable cabinet member for president s. Thats important to the senate so we have a chance to interview and deal with our cabinet members and its important to the country for the president to be able to have his choice of a cabinet member promptly considered and confirmed. So as a matter of fairness, if having a hearing ten days after receiving the last of mr. Perezs paperwork and six days after receiving mr. Kings paperwork was good enough for president obama, why is it not appropriate to have a hearing 23 days or three weeks after we received mr. Scalias paperwork. It would be hard for me as chairman to justify treating President Trumps nominees worse than we treated president obamas nominees. As for todays hearing. Senator murray and i will each have an Opening Statement and then the secretary will introduce mr. Scalia. We welcome her. After his testimony, senators will each have five minutes of questions and well have two rounds of questions so senators can have time to ask them. I know as is often the case, there are other meetings and hearings going on this morning, so ive asked mr. Scalia to stay for the two rounds. Last week, a Washington Times headline red jobs report shows strong economy, growing wages, low unemployment rate. Wages are growing at an annual rate of 3. 2 . Overall, unemployment is at a 50year low. Businesses and workers need a secretary of labor who will steer the department with a steady hand. I believe mr. Scalia has those skills. His broad experience in both the public and private sector, a partner in the Washington Office where he spent the majority of his career dealing with his issues, 2002 and 2003, he was solicitor of the department of labor as the departments chief lawyer, he led initiatives to protect workers to improve enforcement of workforce safety laws. For example, he continued a case started by the Clinton Administration to ensure that a poultry factory was paying workers what they were owed. The department ultimately announced a 10 million settlement for workers. In 1992 he left the firm to serve as special assistant to william barr, he graduated with distinction from the university of virginia in 1985, university of Chicago Law School where he was editor in chief of the law review. Hes been a guest lecturer on unEmployment Law at Chicago Law School, adjunct professor at the university of the district of columbia. He and his wife have seven children. Hes all together well qualified for this job. Its important for the department to create an environment to help employers and employees succeed in todays rapidly changing workplace. One step the Trump Administration has taken to help the 700,000 americans who own and run their own franchises is to is involved with what we call the joint employer standard. In the obama years in 2015, the National Labor Relations Board issued a decision overturning more than 30 years of precedent creating a new standard. That decision meant that indirect or unexercised control over employees working conditions could make a franchiser joint employees. The department of labor itself issued a guidance broadening the interpretation of joint employer. That has led to a lot of confusion. One judge said federal courts have adopted a dizzying world of multifactored test for determining joint employment. The administration has attempted to eliminate this. June 2017, secretary acosta withdraw the guidance. In june of this year, the Comment Period closed for a new rule which we hope will bring stability and then a second way the administration has sought to create more certainty for employees and employers has been to raise the salary threshold for overtime pay in a reasonable way. In 2014 the Obama Administration more than doubled that threshold. There was bipartisan opposition from congress. The department has proposed a much more reasonable rule, the departments proposal would require input from workers and employees prior to future changes. Im glad to see these steps. As i mentioned earlier, the Senate Confirmed john king as United States secretary of education about a month after president obama said he wanted mr. King to serve as secretary. In this case, its been about two months since President Trump announced that he would in a moment mr. Scalia to be the next labor secretary and the committee had has all of mr. Scalias paperwork and had an opportunity to meet with him for the past three weeks. The committee considered president obamas cabinet nominees promptly and with respect. It was embarrassing then and it is now for well qualified americans to be nominated by the president of the United States, any president , for an important position and then say to them in effect you are innocent until nominated or drag things out for a long period of time. Mr. Scalia is supported by a number of trade organization and is the committee has received letters of support from women he has mentored from career attorneys whom he worked with while he was solicitor from an hispanic immigrant who he represented on a pro bono basis and from one of senator ted kennedys former senior counsels on the judiciary committee. I ask consent that those letters and 17 additional letters of support be committed into the record. The committee will vote on tuesday on mr. Scalias nomination and i look forward to the full Senate Confirming him soon. Senator murray. Thank you very much mr. Chairman. It is good to see you. Thank you for joining us today to introduce the nominee. Mr. Scalia, i appreciate you and your family being here today. I look forward to you introducing your apparently very large family behind you. I know that will take a while, but we welcome all of you as well. Mr. Chairman, i do want to start by expressing my frustration with this rushed process and i have asked repeatedly to delay this confirmation hearing because i do believe that every nominees background should be reviewed carefully and thoroughly, especially for a role this important. Moving from a formal nomination that came on september 11th to confirmation in less than two weeks as we have in this case, is deeply concerning. Members have not been given enough time to review mr. Scalias background and i have repeatedly asked for more time and in fact we did not get answers to followup questions until late last night. So i want to be clear, i do not consider this nominees vet complete or sufficient and i will be asking questions and gathering information about your record and i expect thorough answers and im sure you will give them. Thank you. The chairman has said theres going to be a markup next tuesday and i really do urge the chairman to move the markup so everyone really does have more time to consider this nominees very long, complex record. Why . Because workers and families across the country are counting on us to take our vetting responsibility seriously, especially since President Trump clearly wont. His first nominee was a millionaire fast food ceo who disparaged his own workers and was forced to withdraw from nomination. His second pick served as a yesman before resigning. President trumps third pick, is an elite corporate lawyer who has spent his career fighting for corporations and against workers. I oppose mr. Scalias nomination to the department of labor back in 2001. 18 years later, his record defending corporations has gotten longer. The need for someone who will stand up for workers and families and stand up to President Trump on their behalf has only become more urgent. Because we have seen time and again that President Trump will not hesitate to throw working families under the bus to help corporations and billionaires and the powerfully connected get even further. When he worked with republicans to move a tax cut. From rolling back a rule ensuring workers receive their overtime pay, to blocking democrats efforts to raise the minimum wage and ensure equal pay, to seizing every opportunity to undermine workers rights to organize and join a union so they can advocate for higher pay and a safer workplace. The Trump Administration has consistently sided with corporations over workers. Now, instead of nominating someone who understands the challenges working people will face, President Trump has chosen a powerful corporate lawyer who has devoted his career to protecting big corporations and ceos from accountability and attacking workers rights and protections. President trump has nominated a secretary of corporate interest. If theres one consistent pattern in mr. Scalias long career, its hostility to the very workers he would be charged with protecting and the very laws he would be charged with enforcing if he would be confirmed. Like when he threw billions of dollars of workers Retirement Savings into jeopardy by suing to strike down the fiduciary rule. It required Financial Advisers to put their clients interest ahead of their own. And mr. Scalias made a career of striking down laws for big businesses looking to hack away at the safeguards and protections meant to avoid another economic crash, to fighting against protections for Workers Health and safety. When the department was working on a rule requiring employers to make accommodations to help prevent and address one of the most commonplace workplace injuries, mr. Scalia dismissed the Health Concerns of hundreds of thousands of workers as, quote, junk science and crusaded on behalf of corporate clients to undermine and overturn that rule. He hasnt fought against rules but also those to protect workers wages from being stolen by employers. Democrats have been pushing to raise the minimum wage to 15, to end the lower wage for tipped workers, to close the pay gap and make sure workers are not cheated out of their hardearned pay. Republicans continue to block our efforts to pay workers more, so i believe we need a secretary who cares about giving workers a raise, not one who criticized president obamas decision to increase the minimum wage for workers who are unfederal contracts. Not one who fought to help corporate clients steal employees tip and is get out of paying overtime wages and we need someone who will hold companies accountable. The last time mr. Scalia served in the department of labor, he restricted protections that prevent retaliation against whistleblowers so severely he garnered bipartisan criticism for being openly hostile to whistleblowers. When it comes to accountability for discrimination, mr. Scalias record is unacceptable. In one case, he defended a company that discriminated against a job applicant because of her hairstyle. In another, which mrhe argued t employers should be able to discriminate against people with disabilities based on perceptions about what they can do and successfully undermine the landmark protections in the americans with disabilities act. When it comes to accountability for workplace harassment, his record got worse. While our nation is grappling with this epidemic, mr. Scalia is working to help get businesses off the hook. 30 women have been fighting to hold ford accountable for Sexual Harassment and assault they allege they experienced in the workplace, everything from unwanted touching to assault. Mr. Scalia has been fighting to get their case out of court. Our nation needs a secretary of labor who will prioritize addressing the epidemic of workplace harassment not someone who thinks the bar for what qualifies as harassment should be higher or that the standard of accountability should be lower. And these are all just a few examples of the larger alarming pattern of his career. His nomination offers a straight forward test for each of us. If you care about workers and families, his record is absolutely to me disqualifying for secretary of labor. But if like President Trump you want someone who run up the score board for corporations and billionaires at the expense of working families, his antiworker record is exactly what youre looking for. People are getting more and more tired of President Trumps antiworker agenda, the last thing they want to see from this administration is one more person using their power to look out for those at the top. So i hope everyone who claims to care about working families watches this hearing closely, looks at mr. Scalias record thoroughly and thinks long and hard about whether the workers they represent really want them to fight for someone who will not fight for them. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator murray. Well welcome the nominee, mr. Scalia. The secretary currently serves as the United States transportation secretary. Secretary, welcome. Thank you. Chairman alexander, Ranking Member, murray, before introducing todays nominee, please let me acknowledge senator Johnny Isakson who announced his retirement. His leadership on the pension protect act of 2006 has greatly benefitted workers and our country and you will be dearly missed. Im pleased to be here today to introduce Eugene Scalia who ive known for years. And i can attest to his keen intellectual, respect for the rule of law, personal integrity and commitment to protecting our nations workers. Let me know that theres a corum of scalia friends here. Shes been a strong guiding influence on her family. She ensured that gene read a long biography of samuel adams when he was just in graduate school to emphasize the important of dedication and character in Public Service. This is just one of the many ways that genes parents instilled within him a profound respect for Public Service, for the founding principles of our country, and for the importance of using ones talents to make a difference for others. These ideals and backgrounds are important to genes success as a respected counselor and adviser throughout his Government Service and as a formable attorney, dedicated volunteer during his many years in private practice. He has served three previous cabinet officers including me with distinction. In addition to lecturing at his alma mater, the University Chicago school of law, gene has donated his time as a visiting professor at the university of the district of columbias David Clark School of law to help develop and support the next generation of young leaders. He helped support a law camp for High School Students organized by the National Hispanic Bar Foundation and somehow he found time to volunteer as a public member of the administrative conference of the United States. As a former solicitor at the u. S. Department of labor, gene knows very well the issues at the department. During his tenure, he did a stellar job of leading the departments attorneys, both career and noncareer, and was widely respected for his fairness, his ability, and his integrity. In private practice, gene volunteered his time to represent on pro bono basises, many, many workers fighting discrimination in the workforce. When i was secretary of labor and he was solicitor, gene played a Critical Role in the departments numerous enforcement actions, vindicating the rights of American Workers under our nations Employment Laws. He was a leader in our work to update 40yearold overtime regulations to better protect our nations workers. Genes work to protect overtime is why he gained the support of the 13,000 member strong Sergeants Benevolent Association of new york which is able to secure 20 million in unpaid overtime compensation for their members because of the overtime regulations that he helped to craft. Gene understands that the mission of the u. S. Department of labor is to protect and promote our countrys most valuable resource, the American Workforce. He also recognizes that because of the needs and composition of the American Workforce and how its continually changing, the Department Must also been forwardlooking, responsive and nimble. Gene is one of the nations leading experts on labor and Employment Laws. And the issues at the forefront of a rapidly evolving workplace and workforce. He understands what it takes to protect workers and the importance of strong, relevant job Training Programs to empower workers with the skills that they need to succeed in an increasing competitive workplace. I want to thank the committee for allowing me this time to introduce the president s nominee to be the next United States secretary of labor, Eugene Scalia, thank you. Thank you. We know that you have a business schedule, when that schedule requires you to leave, youre excused. We appreciate you coming. Its good to have you before the committee. Mr. Scalia, we invite you to give your opening remarks and invite you also to introduce your family. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member murray. If i could begin by introducing first my wonderful wife trish seated next to my daughter isabella, my daughter megan, jack, bridgett, my oldest son neno and certainly not to be forgotten is my 10yearold daughter erin. Beside her, my deeply understanding parents in law, susan and chris larson. And my son luke. Welcome. Im very grateful to my brother for joining and i next to matthew, my formidable mother, marie scalia. Thank you for being here. My brother, john, my sisterinlaw adel, my brother chris and my Sister Kathryn is here as well. My with her husband, i believe, my sister mary claire, her husband, michael murray. My and my baby sister meg with her husband john bryce. And, trish, did i miss anybody . I thank them all for coming. Thank you for your patience and thank you for allowing me to introduce them not on my fiveminute clock for my Opening Statement. Chairman alexander and Ranking Member murray, thank you for the opportunity to appear today before this committee. Its an honor to be here and an honor to have been nominated to serve as secretary of labor. Im deeply grateful to the president for this nomination and for his trust and confidence. I thank e lelaine for that instruction. She established clear priorities and a smooth operating structure. If im confirmed, her management will be a model for me. The Labor Department is a venerable agency with an important mission, enforcing the workers protections enacted by congress, offering programs that help prepare americans for a lifetime of Productive Work while also helping supply the Skilled Workforce needed by our businesses. And providing support to workers who have fallen on hard time, loss of work, loss of retirement benefits, or Workplace Injury or illness. This is work that i valued when i served previously as solicitor, the departments thirdranking official. Then as i was coming to the department from the private sector where i advised businesses regarding employment matters. But once at the department, i had new clients, new responsibilities and above all, i had a public trust. I am proud with the actions i took before as solicitor to further the departments mission. That included helping to resolve a labor dispute at the west coast ports that threatened to cripple the nations economy. My goal was to act with favor neither toward the company nor toward the union, but to help them resolve the dispute. I focused our enforcement efforts on low wage and immigrant workers, encouraged increased use of an osha tool and took an unprecedented legal action to protect a whistleblower blower. I took these actions because i believe they were right, they furthered the departments mission and because i believe in law and order. But there was more too. The most affecting part of the job for me was encountering individual workers in sometimes tragic circumstances and recognizing that a capacity that we had to respond. The construction workers who died in trenching against. The 12 miners in alabama who gave their lives trying to rescue others. Migrant workers who sacrifice by their families was preyed upon by others. The Labor Department is a big agency with many programs, components and acronyms. But if confirmed, i will aim to remain mindful every day of the individual men and women like those to whom our efforts ultimately are targeted. Back in the private sector, much of my work has been in the public eye, but theres been an important part of my job that went largely unseen. That included helping clients address workplace misconduct, including retaliation and harassment. Ive advised clients to fire or take other serious action against executives and other managers who in my judgment had engaged in harassment or other misconduct. I have had direct and forceful conversations with clients telling them to take steps that sometimes they wished they did not have to. Something that became important to me at my law firm was supporting Young Lawyers who were trying to balance the demands of their jobs with their roles as young parents. In recent years, many of the Young Lawyers i worked with, were on a parttime work schedule so educational background so they could spend more times with their families. Shortly before the president announced he would nominate me, i organized a program for our summer interns to hear from men and women at the firm who were trying to strike that balance. Ive had the good fortune to pursue a demanding career while balancing family life. It became a mission to support women in the law to do the same. I look forward to your questions this morning. And to a dialogue i want to continue. I enjoy exchanging ideas with people who see things differently than i do and im betting ill be getting some of that today. Thats good. I learn from it. And it is partly through this dialogue with you that i hope to justify the president s confidence and to be the best possible secretary of labor, should by confirmed. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Scalia. And welcome to member families. Well now begin a fiveminute round of questions. I would appreciate, senators, the idea is that the questions and answers can be completed within five minutes if mr. Scalia doesnt have time to answer a question, ill give him more time if he needs it to answer that question and well have two rounds of questions to make sure that all senators have a chance to ask the questions that they would like. Senator collins . Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you for accommodating my schedule as im managing the markup of a bill in appropriations this morning. Mr. Scalia, before moving onto important programs at the dol, including the h 2 b program thats important to the economy of maine, i want to follow up and ask you about the perception of some that you will not prioritize the health, safety and economic wellbeing of working people. Weve heard that this morning. From your time as solicitor, what specific examples can you provide us of when you acted to protect workers in wage and hour cases . Senator collins, thank you for the question and for focusing on that Central Mission of the department. One of the first actions that i took as solicitor when i was at the Labor Department before, actually, the chairman referred to briefly in his opening remarks, there was a possible case, an investigation that had been at the department for about two years when i came in as the solicitor position concerning what are called dawning and doffing practices. Whether to pay employees for putting on cumbersome gear. The Clinton Administration has overseen an investigation but had not been prepared to go forward with the case. When i came into the solicitors office, that case had been around for about two years. I very quickly in the job sat down, looked at the statute, regulations, met with the career folks and decided, yes, this time should be paid. We obtained a 10 million settlement with one of the companies involved. It was one of the largest settlements at the time in the history of the wage and hour division. And then, we sued the other employer in a case that was ultimately won under the secretary. Thats theres more senator, but i should yield some time back to you. Thank you. In your work in the private sector, do you have examples of where you represented employees and obviously the bulk of your practice has been representing employers and my related question is was that pro bono work or were you hired to do so . I did pro bono work for a number of different employees in my time at the firm. Just two or three examples, one, again, chairman alexander referred to, it was a young hispanic woman who had a hearing disability who believed that she had been subjected to discrimination in her workplace due to her ethnicity and that condition and i represented her, was able to work out an agreement with her employer to enable her to continue to do the work she wanted to do. Shes submitted a letter to the committee about that representation. Ill mention one other, i did this pro bono, this was somebody who was fairly senior in an organization, reported and pressed on the subject of some financial conduct that he thought was improper. He was asked to leave this institution and i represented him in connection with that and with his feeling that he was being treated improperly because he had blown the whistle on financial improprieties. There are others. Turning to the departments role in the h2b program which is important to maines tourism industry. I represent a state with 1. 3 Million People. We have 36 million tourism visits in a year. To, obviously, the workforce is not adequate to handle that. As a result we see restaurants, bed and breakfasts, inns, hotels curtailing their regulars which hurts their regular employees. The department received 96,400 applications on january 1st and thats nearly triple the number of h2b visas. If confirmed will you work with congress to make sure that there are enough visas including opportunities for returning workers, for those employers who have no choice but to rely on a seasonal workforce to be able to operate . Mr. Chairman, if i could have just a moment to respond to that question . Senator collins, one of the privileges of being a nominee is the opportunity to meet with you all, with members of this committee, members of the senate and to learn, and i have learned from you and from some of your other colleagues about some of the challenges that program presents and how critical it is to businesses and the employees that benefit from them as well. I regard that program and ensuring as best we can that it functions properly to be an important priority, if im confirmed. Thank you. Thank you, senator collins. Senator murray. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Earlier this month the Census Bureau released data that the gender pay gap is alive and well. Just a day after that data was released, the Trump Administration took steps to protect companies and sweep pay discrimination under the rug by rolling back the back paid Data Collection at the equal Employment Opportunity commission. So we couldnt collect the data and the secretary of labors job is to protect those workers and fight for their rights and speak out on their behalf. So i wanted to ask you today a few straight forward yesorno questions. Do you accept the Census Bureaus data that shows women are only paid 82 cents for what men are paid. I dont know that ive seen that particular survey. But i am familiar with data suggesting that the figure is about the point that youve identified. I think theres some data that puts it perhaps slightly lower. Im aware of that. Im the lead sponsor of the paycheck fairness act. The house passed it earlier this year. Would you support passage of the paycheck fairness act . I support fairness in pay and fair working conditions for women. Its something that in my work at my lawmak firm but you wont commit to supporting that bill. I will commit two thinks. I can commit to providing my resources the senate might find helpful in deliberating that legislation and if it becomes law which is of course your decision, the senates decision, if it becomes law, i certainly promise to vigorously enforce it. If these trends continue its going to be 75 years before that gap gets any better. With just over 2 1 2 years in office, President Trumps administration has ruled out a range of policies that are do you find to reduce workers wages and protect corporations who are engaging in what we call wage threat. The department of labor instituted the socalled paid program. Its a wage theft Amnesty Program that allows employers to audit themselves. They proposed to rescind the overtime rule and replace it with a far weaker rule. And of course the house has threatened to veto the house passed raise the wage act which would raise the wages of 30 million workers. Can you commit if you are confirmed you will end the paid program, yes or no . I cannot commit that. I can commit to review it. But i would also like to underscore how the economy that we have in substantial part because of this president s policies is delivering virtually unprecedented benefits to i have very little time. A couple of important questions and i want to know yes or no can you commit to placing the overtime rule on hold, yes or no . Senator, i can commit to review carefully the ongoing rule makings that are at the department. One of my responsibilities will be to look at them with a fair and open mind. But i dont feel it would be appropriate for me to commit can you commit to the joint employer, yes or no . Respectfully, no i cant commit, because i respect the notice and comment process established by korns and would want to see what the public say about it and help guide the agency making the right decision. Can you commit to encouraging the president to withdraw his veto threat on the minimum wage bill . Again, Ranking Member murray, if im so fortunate as to be confirmed,s that an area in which id like to be able to provide support to the congress and the president who ultimately themselves will have to make the decision what the proper wage is. Were then ready to work with you. Thank you. And i have a very long question next, so i will retain my 20 seconds for my next round. You certainly have that prerogative, senator murray. Senator murkowski. Thank you. And i apologize for kind of jumping the line, but i too have to go into the same appropriations markup. Mr. Scallia, welcome. Thank you for your willingness to step forward here. I understand that senator collins asked a question related to the h2b visas and as you and i have had discussions, this is eye key and critical issue in my state as we work to address the just dramatic seasonality that we have within our fisheries the lack of available workers, and the need to find a permanent fix, not a bandaid fix that we have. Weve been struggling with, made a little bit of headway. But again seeking your commitment that you will work with us as other coastal states that have such significant interests in their seafood industry . Yes. As i mentioned to senator collins, i learned from my meetings with you and others who spoke to me about this program and the challenges that it can present in particularly Seasonal Industries that sometimes are vital to a community, not just to the works or a particular company, but a community. And if i am confirmed, i do generally look forward both to focusing on ways we can ensure that this program fulfills its mission and communicating with you and continue to work with you to do our best to implement the program. We look forward to that. We had 43 million salmon coming into the bay this season, not 43 Million People. Well go into that later. I wanted to ask you a little bit more about the industry recognized apresentishship programs, in developing standards in addition to the registered apresentisship models that been in place. I do know the registered apprenticeships havent been used widely and some employers consider the process to be time consuming. In our state weve got many registered apresentisships. Weve heard from some of our unions up north that they are concerned that the training will not be as rigorous as the registered aprenticeships. Safety on the job site being compromised, they do support keeping the construction trades out of the framework. I have been concerned that some employers may see it as a way to create tax payer funded Training Programs that will fit their immediate needs, but perhaps will not provide the employees with the high quality and portable skills that i think we recognize are need and respected within the industry. Your thoughts a little bit more on the departments efforts and whether or not you think that the construction trades should be included in that effort at all . Senator, thank you for raising it. Its an important subject, and happily i think one as to which theres consensus, even across the aisle on certain basics. I think that people interested in our workforce and people interested in education too recognize the value that apprenticeship programs can have for workers, that they can provide benefits that may not be available in traditional educational settings. And obviously they are valuable to americans business productivity, they can serve as one critical way of filling the skills gap. Senator, youre referring to an ongoing rule making at the Labor Department, which is seeking to expand apprenticeship opportunities. I think again theres consensus to an extent that more apprenti apprenticeships would be a good thing. I recognize that some are concerned that it might be approached in a way that undermines existing successful programs or that doesnt really provide the rigor needed to protect the interests of workers. I think those are the important considerations that need careful attention as the Labor Department moves forward. And again, if im fortunate enough to be confirmed, i know that is one of the very important things that will be on my plate and what the public has to say in that notice and comment process is going to be important to me in striking the right balance. I appreciate that and look forward to working with you. I do have other questions but ill submit them for the record and i appreciate this. Thank you, senator murkowski. Thank you. Senator casey. There, mr. Chairman. Mr. Scalia, good to see you here and see your family. Thanks for taking the time to talk yesterday. We had a good conversation. I have to start by saying im skeptical of your nomination based upon your record as a lawyer and even the work at the department of labor in that period of time you were there. When i compare that record with the mission of the department, im just reading from the departments website, the mission in summary form is to foster, pronote and develop the welfare of wage earners, job seekers and retirees of the United States. Number two, improve working conditions, advance working assure work related benefits and rights. So i have real concerns. Let me start with a reference from your Opening Statement. One group of americans you referenced were coal miners. I think you referenced alabama miners. I come from a state that has a long coal mining tradition. At this point, weve got real concerns about what used to be called in the old, old days, miners asthma, black lung. Im holding here a letter from two labor organizations, United Mine Workers and steel workers, sent to the department that you hope to lead in june, raising questions about and asking for a new standard with regard to res pirable cristaline silica. This was made in the request, quote, one in five miners with 25 years or more of experience are suffering from black lung. In many of these miners, the disease has advanced to the pmf stage, progressive massive fibrosis, the worst stage of black lung caused by the inhalation of skoal and silica dust. I guess the basic question i have for you, and this is referenced also in the letter where the both the head of the mine workers, mr. Roberts, and head of the steel workers, says msha meaning the part of labor that does the regulation should consider the osha promulgating a new role that is as if not more protective of miners. Currently our nation provides less protection from silica of miners than to any other group of workers. Do you agree with that statement . Senator casey, i enjoyed our meeting yesterday too and appreciate your taking the time. I also genuinely share your interest in the mine safety and health administration. I mentioned it in my opening because the importance of the Labor Department to conditions in that industries is especially great. Theres not another agency that has an agency dedicated to it. When i was there it really did come home to me, particularly in connection with that alabama disaster. How important a role could be. I helped put together an emergency standard to deal with the some of the problems that had caused that accident with respect to pmf particularly. I am aware that there is concern that new mining techniques are causing an increase in this. And ive reviewed some materials possibly that letter. It is something that i would want to understand better. Just want to cut you off. We have limited time. Just want to ask you a very simple question. Asked you do you agree. Do you agree with the standard should be in a sense twice as worse for the coal miner as opposed to any other worker . And i thinks that just yes or no . Senator, i dont know what the exact standards are. I agree that this is an issue that i would want to look at and was brought to my attention. Its an important one. If im confirmed i would hope to get a chance if youre confirmed id ask you to do that. Finally, more time later, but i wanted to ask you a question about a part of the department of labor that has the obligation to do enforcement. I would argue that enforcement of our trade agreements has been lacking under several administrations going back many, many years. But the proposal by the administration now to cut the bureau of labor affairs, which is the entity that does trade enforcement, to cut it by 78 from roughly 86 million to a little more than 18 million, a 67. 5 million cut. Does that make any sense to you . Do you agree with a cut of that dimension where funding has been pretty level for many years . Senator, i do believe that fairness in trade agreements and particularly with respect to working conditions has been a priority for this president. That particular program is one that if im confirmed i would commit to take a look at and evaluate whether it would be able to continue to perform its mission. Ive heard no good rationale for 78 cut in an office that does trade enforcement. Ti f thank you. Sure. Senator isakson. Welcome. Its good to have you. I appreciate the time you gave me last week in conversation. Congratulations on your great family. Youd solve our labor problem. We could use you in the chicken industry in georgia. I am familiar with the case ta you worked on. Georgia is the largest poultry prouser, if anybody it is a tough job and the stuff they wear that you work for them to be able to include in their earned time for their pay is tremendously important. The first thing they want to do is get hosed off before they walk in. I appreciate what you did for chicken workers very much and wasnt aware of it. I knew they had a good lawyer because they won the case. Nobody ever brags about the lawyers, so ill do it. The results are clear. And you made both sides happy which is even harder. Ive listened to a lot of things said today. Youve been asked so many yes and no questions to which there are no yes and no answers. Its like a trap. You stop being you say yes, it means you did. Either way you cant answer a lot of questions yes and no. That was not a question to me, was it . No. I was not asking you to believe me. But i am reminded of a lot of cases in my history of up leer like erg nomics where they took a terminology that i was not familiar with at the time and began to apply in the application of a rule that was to be administered by the department of labor that said no grocery bagging kid could not load more than 35 pounds. They started providing finite definite limits to jobs that were done, forced employment to go up or down. And it was implied because of an arbitrary formula. I want to ask you a question. Can you sign a case or two where as a lawyer who negotiates these things where or negotiating, you think some cases other than the chicken case where youve bon involved in where the resolution was one that allowed the flexibility of the enforcement of the rule, a benefit to the employer and the employee at the same time which is ultimately the way those rules are doing it . Senator, if i could say first, it was a privilege to sit and speak with you. I do want to echo secretary cha oe. The poultry case was interesting to me in part because when i came before this committee before, i was asked by senator john ed wairwards from north carolina, whether id worked in a poultry factory. I hadnt. He believed that that reflected i would be unable to understand the concerns of poultry workers. I therefore found it ironic when one of the first things i did was see the problems in that plant and authorize that important litigation. So thank you. I think that achieving the kind of winwin that youve described is something that you seek for in litigation at times, but i would point particularly to some of the advice and counsel work that ive done for clients, where its as i said in my opening, a part you dont see necessarily, but i did spend a fair amount of my time as a private practice lawyer telling clients what their obl gages were, helping them meet them by putting together antidiscrimination policies or policies to help workers get accommodation under the a. D. A. And then as i mentioned at times pushing clients pretty hard to do what the law and sometimes decency indicated they needed to do. That is one area i was proud i was able to try to accomplish. Thats exactly what i was talking about. That is so much of the stuffs that the result of your work, happens in the back rooms, is never seen in the courtroom. The important thing is you put together an adversary and and advocate but they come to a common ground. Ive got just 40 seconds. One more question if i can. I want to thank your reminding me to thank secretary chao. Im getting ready to enjoy a pension one of these days. Im glad we protected it when i wasnt here. My last question, the joint employment. Senator murray works with me on the Workforce Development. Its for workers. I think the Labor Department enjoys so much. S that a perfect bipartisan example. I do want to talk about the joint employer role just to give you a thought. The statement was made that about how important the joint employment rule is to the future of employment and workers in the United States of america. I dont know ifs that a fair statement to make or not. The application of the joint employer rule to the franchise industry alone which is most of americans of all business will put them in the history books in terms of employers, pure and simple. And its because of the application of that as fair as it may sound, is absolute impossible for somebody to make a living and run a business and support their workers to do. I hope when joint employer is finally ruled on, we wont look at it as an absolute yes or no solution, but instead understand that there are millions and millions and millions of americans who are employed today by franchise operators and others who would not be employed joint employer were the rule of the United States of america. Thats my speech. I want to yield the rest of my time to you because im not going to be able to stay for a second round. Thank you, senator isakson. Senator smith. I think it might be senator baldwins turn. Didnt see her come in. Excuse me. No worries. Senator baldwin. Excuse me. Thank you. First of all, thank you for meeting with me earlier this week, and i want to welcome you, mr. Scalia and your family to the health committee. Mr. Scalia, your history and record on worker safety is of concern to me and is not what id be looking for as in our next secretary of labor. Specifically on behalf of United Parcel service, ups, you opposed rules that would have required employers to pay for protective equipment for workers that they needed to stay safe on the job. You represented seaworld in a wellknown case when they contested monetary fines and three citations, including a willful citation. Earlier this year i met with a former nurse and a constit went of mine by the name of patricia moon updike. On june 24th, 2015, while helping a patient, she was kicked in the throat, nearly collapsing her trachea. The assault led to multiple surgeries to save her life, and it sadly resulted in the loss of her ability to work as a nurse, which was her dream job since she was 9 years old. Violence is now the third leading cause of workplace deaths. The Obama Administration issued a proposal similar to a bills that ive introduced call the prevention of Workplace Violence in health care and social assistance that would protect health care and social services workers, like patricia, my const constit went, protect them from violent attacks. Osha has dragged its feet and still hasnt finallilizized fin proposal. Will you commit to prioritizing this and make sure it is finalized, yes or no . If i could say, i did generally enjoyour meeting and i appreciate it, your time. Did you say generally or genuinely . I said genuinely and in full. And with respect to the work that i did, if i could just respond briefly, i did handle certain cases for clients. It was my job in my firm and i had a duty actually to do that vigorously as a lawyer. When i was at at Labor Department before, i was ever mindful that i had a new set of responsibilities and even a higher set of responsibilities. Most important thing to me as a practicer has been fidelity to my obligations and the law. There was a letter submitted by about 13 folks i worked with about how i discharged those responsibilities while i was there. Workplace violence happens. There are times when the employer is on notice and should be taking steps. I think there is a role for osha in that context. There is a balance to be struck, obviously, for those instances when its just purely personally motivated and one wouldnt expect the hold the employer responsible. But i have been briefed on this issue. I know it is important to you. And if im confirmed i would like to look at it more closely and i would genuinely like to speak to you about it further. I appreciate that. And i would note in terms of patricias case that she was providing medical care to a youth at a juvenile detention facility and this is the type of context where we see social workers and nurses, and i think its i hate to see the agency dragging its feet on implemtation on something so vital. Ive seen the hazard in that environment too. According to the bureau of labor statistics more than 5,000 workers were killed on the job in 2017 and almost 3 million workers were injured or got sick on the job. Now osha data shows worker safety enforcement activity is down and the number of inspectors under this administration is at record lows. Mr. Scalia, will you commit to supporting increasing the number of osha inspectors so it can fulfill its mission and keep workers safe . If i could respond briefly, mr. Chairman, any workplace fatality is too many, but the number has been down in the last couple of years. We can be thankful for that. But you are correct, the number of osha inspectors is lower than secretary acosta for example wanted it to be. And i would commit to you to take a look at steps that might be necessary to get the number of inspectors up to an appropriate level. Mr. Scalia and i too have appropriations to follow. Okay. Very good. Senator, thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Scalia its good to see you. I enjoyed our conversation together. Our young people are told they need to go to college in order to get a good job, and in many cases we find young people getting a College Degree and not finding a good job that actually requires a College Degree. Almost about a third are working in jobs that dont require College Degree. We as a nation have not been effective in educating people in career pacts that have more rewarding opportunities for them. Some discussion of providing free college to everybody would just exasser bait the problem. I wonder is there something that you think is important to be done in your administration to help educate people and encourage paths other than just for your college, paths that may yield greater Economic Prosperity and opportunity . Senator, i enjoyed our meeting as well, and appreciate the importance of that very question. I was an english major in college. I thought for awhile that that was a background everybody should enjoy. But the truth is i suffer the same problem, yes. The truth is that it doesnt always best equip one for the American Workforce and there are other ways that can be invaluable to people entering the workforce and to filling the skills gap that we have in our economy. This president has convened an interagen interagen Interagency Group that has included the department of labor and department of education to look among other things as apprenticeships as an alternative way of educating people. But educating them in a way that is more directly targeted toward ensuring they have skills and talents that will be used for them for a lifetime of work. I think those programs are one valuable way. I think the attention brought to the issue by commissions such as the president s are another. Thank you. I presume you are fully committed to putting the interests of American Workers first and consistent with that where our american interests and the interests of our farmers and ranchers are also involved, that i hope youd commit to endeavor to see if we cant make our htwoa more beneficial. Im not asking for a specific remd dation. See if we can protect the American Workers first, at the same time provides for the interests of our farmers and ranchers . Senator, the Labor Department programs that supply extra workers to businesses that for example have particularly high seasonal demands or for other reasons are unable to attract American Workers to their positions are a central role of the department. It is genuinely an area where i think theres something for everybody to be pleased with. Its an opportunity for workers. Its an opportunity for companies to bring in workers who otherwise might not be available. It is important in supervising that interface, intersection, between worker and company, that the Labor Department be user friendly. S that something that doesnt always come easy from the department. Ive heard from you and others of ways we might fall short. If im confirmed, thats high on my list of areas that because of its importance to everybody, i want to look at closely and see if theres more we can do. Thank you. You have been characterized adds being antiunion by some, ands that also a malady i share, and the accusation, not the reality. I fully believe that the unions play an Important Role in our society, have helped provide greater safety for our workers, greater ploichlt opportunities, higher wages, and believe this plays a very Important Role going forward. What are your thoughts about the American Labor and unions . Our labor laws were written, signed by dwight eisen hour, its been a long time since weve had legislation in this regard . What are your thoughts . You have 21 seconds. Its an Important Role that ive praised in a number of contexts. Ive talked in articles about how labor unions can be among the most Effective Advocates you will see for workplace, safety and health. Ive written about that, seen it in a number of contexts, and ive seen unions work effectively to address discrimination and ive praised them for that. Ive said as well that its fundamental to our system that workers have the ability to decide whether to form a union, and ive said, ive written, that there are some workplaces where the best thing you could have for achieving the best terms and decisions will be a labor union. Thank you, senator romney. Mr. Chairman, if im unable to be here, i yield my minutes five minutes of time to you, sir. Thank you very much. Sue, senator romney. And senator smith. Thank you, mr. Chair and Ranking Member murray, and thank you very much, mr. Scalia, and thanks for your willingness to serve our country. I appreciated the chance to visit when you when you came to my office. We taucouched on the issue of pensions. Last year right after i was sworn into the senate, one of the first visits i made was to duluth, minnesota to talk with them about the pension fund. And as you know, that pension fund and more than 100 others are projected to collapse in the next two decades, leaving at least 22,000 minnesotans and maybe as many as a Million People across the country without their Retirement Savings. Folks are scared. Ill not forget the conversation i had with a woman named vickie. She sid i dont have a plan b. My plan b is living under a bridge. I came to understand how this issue affects businesses as well. Theyve paid in. They face, businesses face, millions in costs if these plans fail. One Business Owner told me his business that he has spent 30 years building is effectively worthless because of this pension issue. I assume you believe in the unions right to collectively bargain for pernnsions and benefits . I do. Do you believe that the Current Situation is the fault of the workers in these plans . Senator, youre referring to the challenges facing for example the Central States plan . Correct. If i could i guess answer a little bit more broadly, the when we think of the Labor Department, we often think or i think many people do, of the role in the workplace right now when the person is in the plant, the safety decisions, wage decisions, very important. But pensions are another very central part of what the Labor Department does. And when i was at the Labor Department, we had to deal with the collapse of enron and the impact that that had on the retir retirees or people planning on retirement. It was financially a monumental cat aft roephy. That broke down into tends of thousands of women affected. For no fault of their own. No fault of their own. With respect to the Central States particularly, i know as i said in our meeting, and i enjoyed it too. Generally. Genuinely. And in full. Thats an historic, important plan. I cant claim that i know all of the things that have led to the problems it faces now. But its no solution to blame it now on the workers. Right. Nor would you agree the businesses who paid in as well . Both parties did what they were supposed to do, which is to save. I think theres been a confluence of factors that has led to the problems, and im not steeped enough to know what they are. But i do agree with you that something needs to be done. I think theres bipartisan recognition of that. If i am fortunate enough to be confirmed its something i would want to work on because everybody recognizes the need. That gets to my followup. I want to thank chair alexander who served with me on the select committee on pensions last year. We werent able to come to a resolution, but i think we did achieve some good education there. So i support the Butch Lewis Act which would provide a longterm, lowinterest loan to these troubled Pension Plans. I think congress does need to act urgently. Even the chamber of commerce says this is an urgent issue. Would you agree we need to take urgent action on this . I would agree that we do need to take action. It needs to be a priority both for the workers that are affected and the solvency of the pbgc. Which is the other issue . Right. S that the agency the secretary of labor has responsibility in part that ensures Pension Plans and would face a very serious shortfall if we cant find a solution here. And would you agree that we ought to enact a program of longterm lowinterest loans to help the pensions as the chamber of commerce has recommended . Just because the chamber of commerce says it doesnt mean i believe its right, senator. I would be interested in looking at the different approaches to be taken and finding one that helps workers and also helps taxpayers in the pbgc. As you and i discussed when we met, this is an important, urgent issue. I appreciate your comments. Thank you. Thank you, senator smith. Senator cassidy. Hey, mr. Scalia, nice to see you. I dont read many economists, but there is one from france who has a nice quote about unintended consequences. A bad economist meerl looks at the primary effect if you will whereas the good economist looks at secondary. Minimum wage of 15 an hour, im struck because theres the foundation for Economic Education polled a bunch of economists, seems like theyre underrepresented. 74 of them thought that raising the minimum wage was a bad idea. The article quotes paul krugman. Any ekon 101 student tells you a higher wage leads to unemployment. They give their reasons why they oppose. 69 opposed. Minimum wages educe employment, the earnings of low paid workers, make some better off at the expense of others, youngerer workers who are less skilled are less likely to be employed, lowering future earnings. I could go on. That said,s that a prelude to this question. Have you seen other policies which there is an unintended consequence . On the face of it it sounded greatly. But then you look at the secondary effect. Theyre negative. Youll have to make those judgments as the secretary of labor. Its not about any particular policy, just kind of your experience and your method of analysis. Yes. I think that unfortunately the great majority of the problems that the Labor Department faces involve some tradeoff, where the Central Mission is to protect workers and also it has this very Important Role of training workers and supplying the workforce that american businesses and ultimately American Consumers want availability there. But some of those actions if were not thoughtful about how we go about them, can have adverse consequences by hurting the businesses that supply the jobs, sometimes hurting other workers, because one Group Benefits but another is set back. And so i think that we always need to think, as youre saying, like the good economists, and consider not just the initial first order of facts, but what are the downstream consequences of this . And that i think is something that often is helpfully addressed in the rule making process that we have. A number of Ongoing Department of labor rule makings have been brought up in this hearing. As ive mentioned, that process of hearing from the public about what they think of a proposal and what effects its going to have is a really important way of looking far down the road. So its not so much a yes or no answer is the more nuance, what do we learn from the comments to come up with something in which we evaluate secondary effects and make the maximal good for the maximum number of people. S that exactly right. Now im going to ask you Something Else ar canes that peculiar to louisiana involving sugar and cotton. Usda defines the commodity if you will of sugar and cotton as refined sugar or raw sugar, im sorry, and cotton which has been ginned. Labor, cotton which has been picked, not jind, all the things, and sugarcane itself. Now this as an impact on whether or not my guys can get h 2 as to go and drive their trucks. If the sugar cane is the final product, its h2b. If its an agricultural, its an h2a. It actually seems like the answer which is most apparent, even upon secondary analysis. So that said, would you please consider this . Because right now those drivers are being considered as h2bs. Theyre having a difficult time getting them and their product out of the field, into where it needs to be processed. And the difficulty of that means that theres going to be some product left in the field which is bad for the consumers, farmers, et cetera. So if i could have your commitment, i would appreciate that. I will consider that. That is something that i certainly will look at if i am confirmed. Thank you. Your helped by the expiration of his time. I would like to say ill be unable to stay for the second round. I yield to the chair. Thank you. Thank you, senator cassidy. Senator murphy. Thank you very much. Thank you for being here with us today. As i mentioned to you in our private meeting, i have probably voted for more of this administrations nominees than many of my colleagues. Ive come to the conclusion as long as nominees are qualified and in the sconservative i think theyre worthy of support. Im trying to answer, whether you are indeed qualified. That might seem silly given your decades of experience in the area of Employment Law. But your entire body of work, at least in the private sector, as senator murray mentioned, as been devoted to representing employers against workers, has been devoted to trying to stop workplace protections from being adopted. Now i have plenty of friends who work for Big Companies and in Employment Law and many of them are fine people, but i dont know that i would select them to be the one representative in the federal government in the cabinet whos supposed to speak for workers. You might make a fine secretary of commerce, but i dont know that your experiences are actually are qualifications to be the sole representative of workers. I put that on the record as the struggle that i am having. I ask you a question in means of trying to seek out the values that you are going to bring to the job. Way back in 1985, you wrote an article entitled trivializing the issues behind gay. You said i do not think we should treat it as equally acceptable or desirable as the traditional family life. You concluded by saying im not sure how i stand on the basic issue of gay rights. I appreciate your honesty at the end of that article. My worry is that your views have not necessarily matured as the countrys have, given the fact that earlier this year you joined the board of a group called ethics and Public Policy interest is, which advocates a lot of time to arguing and advocating against the civil rights of lgbtq individuals. So let me ask you to answer the question that you posed at the end of the article. Have your views changed since 1985 on the issues of rights for individuals in that community . Im not asking whether youll follow the law. Im sure you will. But its a question of the priorities youre going to have in this position. Have your views changed since you wrote that article . Senator, thank you for the time that you made to meet with me earlier this week. And with respect to my qualifications, generally for the job, i appreciate your positive words about the background that i had as a longtime labor Employment Lawyer. You said its approaching three decades concentrating in the field. Yes, often i have represented business, but i believe that this committee has the good fortune of my past tenure at the Labor Department, which showed how effectively i am able to recognize the new clients, the new obligations that i have in my capacity to discharge those responsibilities very vigorously. There was a reference easterlyier to the issue of ergonomics. It is true i opposed, by this congress ultimately repaeld the rule. But once i was at the department i worked closely with some of those same lawyers. One of them, the lawyer who had the lead on it, wrote a letter, joint letter, from former career officials supporting my nom naiksnation, as did the chief law judge, joined that letter, saying eugene did a very good, even handed job here. With respect to the article, youre talking about an article i wrote when i was in college in 1985, about 35 years ago, and yes, i certainly have changed in how i view any number of things since i was in college. And i think weve all matured, one would hope, since those days. And i would certainly enforce the law in this area and respect the decisions of the Supreme Court. How have your views changed on this specific issue . You referenced that they were not equal of the same treatment, those different lifestyles. Has that changed . I wouldnt write those words today. I would not in part because i now have friends and colleagues to whom they would cause pain. I would not want to do that. And then finally if i could just say you referred to an organization, i went on their board in march, and its a respected organizations that been praised by paul ryan, the speaker of the house, by george will, charles hammer, gene kirkpatrick, that organization with which ive had brief involvement says nothing about my views on any number of issues. Thanks. Senator scott. Good morning. Thank you for being here. Good morning. I do want to start off by echoing my support for the departments recent efforts on joint employer and overtime. I knows that been mentioned a few times. Johnny spent some time on it as well. I am appreciative of the current direction. I think its incredibly responsible actions on the part of the department. I want to start the conversation off with the topic i think is really important for our workforce and frankly its going to be a topic of discussion for however long you are the secretary of labor, and i hope that that begins sooner than later. Experts say that about 2 trillion of current payroll could be automated. The minimum wage increase, only in my opinion, accelerates automation of the payroll. If we see a greater acceleration towards automation, what we see are the first rung in the ladder of economics sense and mobility being pulled away. Response to that is that low skill folks have fewer opportunities to get engaged in the workforce, the consequence of that is longer terms of unemployment and a debilltating impact on communities of color and in Rural America as well. What are your commence on the notion that there is a relationship or a correlation between a higher minimum wage and lower opportunities to enter the workforce . Senator, its a important potential tradeoff that one has to keep in mind as one thinks about what the proper wage for a National Minimum wage or for local wage might be. Different legislative bodies in differe different locals have reached different conclusions. As youre pointing out, every time you set the wage, i think people on all sides recognize that if a wages that mandated is too high, there will be adverse impacts that actually hurt some of the workers that are meant to be helped. I think that needs to be considered. On the other hand, obviously the workers interests more broadly need to be considered too. We have a longstanding federal policy of having a federal minimum wage, and its the Labor Departments obligation to enforce that. I would note that in new york city when they increased the minimum wage to 15 an hour, that from january 2018 to january 2019, there was a loss of about 6,500 jobs in restaurants which was the lar largest redux since the recession. I think the impact could be measured in the loss of jobs. As a kid who grew up in impofb rishd areas, my first thought the minimum wage was 3. 35, and at that time you could encourage more Employment Opportunities for kids. Im not advocating that position, but i do think its important for us to recognize the powerful impact that the minimum wage increases will have on those folks looking for employment and currently fewer than 3 makes the minimum wage. On apprenticeship programs, i think germany have a great model for apprenticeships. Im looking forward to the day where america is the model for apprenticeships. In South Carolina we have tackled that in a very powerful way, a big shoutout to carolina who has truly taken the responsibility seriously and weve changed the trajectory of apprenticeships in our state by an incredible number. We are now 50 over our 2020 goals. I have loglation cosponsored by some of my friends on the other side that provides tax credits to encourage more utilization of apprenticeshi apprenticeship programs by reducing the costs. Any quick thoughts . Sure. You mentioned german apprenticeship programs when we met and its something i am interested in learning more about if im confirmed. And with respect to South Carolina programs, i had dinner recently with a friend whos been very interested in apprenticeship programs. And by the way she has no South Carolina ties. But she called out South Carolina as a state that really stands out. Shes very educated. Perceptive person. In my few last seconds. The gig economy is something we should have a conversation about, perhaps a hearing, and what the impact that will have on employment and the necessity of having portability and the benefit structure of that economy. I will tell you the only way to truly understand and appreciate the success weve made in South Carolina is perhaps to come visit South Carolina. I would invite you to spend some time throughout the state, charleston being the number one Tourist Destination that ive mentioned. Because my time is running out, mr. Chairman its run out. I am unable to remain for my second round of questions but would like to yield my time to you if necessary. Thank you, senator scott. If i can say, i promise to visit South Carolina tomorrow. For backtoschool day at my daughters college. Very good, sir. Thank you, senator scott. Senator kaine. Thank you, mr. Chair. And mr. Scalia, congregaatulati on the nomination from the president. I noticed in the dialogue with senator murphy, if you go back and read the transcript your answers wouldnt enlighten anyone about the discussion. When he asked about the change in your view you said i would not write those words today. That makes me wanted to follow up. I think know the answer. You do believe lgbtq individuals are allowed equal protection. That is what is the Supreme Court has ordained. You believe it personally . I know what the Supreme Court has said. Im asking about your personal belief. Lgbtq americans are entitled to equal protection of the law. I do. And if i could finish, in the article, it was from college, 1985. Years ago. But im not asking about the article. Im asking about today. Let me follow up. Do you believe it is wrong for an employer to terminate someone based upon their Sexual Orientation or gender identity . I do believe its wrong. Most of my clients had policies against that. Certainly my firm did. And its something that would not have been tolerated by me or my firm or most of my clients. Thank you for that answer. Thats important. Should you be confirmed, could you commit to requiring that Mining Companies who violated Worker Protections and are delinquent in paying the penties assessed against them for that would be held accountable and not be able to open new mines until they square the account and pay the penalties to workers that theyve been assessed . Im familiar with black jewel which is a company that had operations in virginia, west virginia, kentucky and wisconsin, went into bankruptcy and has left thousands of workers in those states in the lurch. S that thats a serious problem. The Labor Department has authority that enables it to seize goods of product of companies that have defaulted on their wage obligations. How about the issue of opening new mines, getting permission to open new mines when there are penalties that have been assessed and are delinquent and havent been paid to the workers for violations . I dont know what the law provides on that. If there are existing laws that prohibit the opening of new mines if theyre unsatisfied pension obligations, that is one that certainly the department would enforce vigorously. In cases of wage theft, the Trump Administration is engaged in a practice when there are wage theft findings, they order back pay but not liquidated damages and often the back pay does not include interest, which means in cases where wage theft has been found workers get the pay but much later and essentially have made an interestfree loan to the company that has violated the wage theft laws. Should you be confirmed, would you make sure that people are made whole, including interest or other calculations that would be necessary to truly make them whole in instances of wage theft . Senator, wage theft is obviously a violation of the law. When i was solicitor, i sought to enforce the wage requirements. A couple of the cases that i brought, certainly at least one instance, one that was innovative to defend rights. There can be circumstances though where you can get more for workers by offering a cooperative program with the government to satisfy obligations that a company has. You see those kinds of cooperative programs across agencies. The Justice Department for example do you believe workers with disability should be paid a sub minimum wage under the standards act or should be paid a minimum wage in the same way as other workers . Section 14 c as i believe you know, senator, authorizes a different wage and potentially a lower wage. I know that its important both to you and to senator hassan, and that is a law that the department is charged with administering. And it was put into law in 1938 when the expectations for individuals with disabilities were vastly different than they are today. Do you have a personal opinion about whether workers with dissent shou disabilities have be paid sub minimum . As you say its a long standing provision. If congress were to change it, the Labor Department would change its approach. With respect to the issue more generally, what i can say is i recognize that there are strongly held views on both sides. I think that there are people on both sides of this issue that many of them really do think that their approach is one that is in the interest of people with disabilities. Sos that a discussion to be had. If im confirmed i would be honored to be a part of it. That is another area where i think there are opportunities for consensus. Bipartisanship. But its a hard issue. Thank you, thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you, senator kaine. Senator murray and i are going to go vote. Well be back shortly. I will stay for a second round of questions until senators have a chance to ask the questions if they would like to. Senator enzi. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And i thank mr. Scalia for being willing to take this job. As we go through confirmation hearings, i often wonder why. Of course i got to ask you that personally, and appreciated your answer and appreciated all the Public Service that youve done. I was here for your 2001 confirmation and enjoyed your answers then and enjoyed the conversation we had the other day in my got to say, youve go the biggest family attending in the 22 1 2 years ive been here. And youve also got the highest percentage that have stayed for the questions. I see that isabella left, the 5yearold. She was probably the one understanding the questions, too. I appreciated senator murrays comments about pay gap. Its something that ive been concerned about for a long time, but im an accountant. You have to settle for the accountants questions. And if anybody isnt being paid the same thingco for the same j in the same company, ill help get an attorney that will prosecute on it. Thats what the law is. It isnt everybodys going to get the same wage thats doing the same job regardless of what company they work for. And the other person might work for. And some of the most fascinating hearings that ive been at here have been ones where people were had gone into nontraditional jobs i remember having a young lady sitting where youre sitting and talking about how she had always wanted to be a brick mason and she was and she got to bill some flower boxes and then she got to build some patios and then she got to build some fountains, and at the present time she was hanging marble on new york sky scrapers at high altitudes, and we asked her what her pay was. I can tell you that she exceeds anything that we make. So if we can get more into the nontraditional jobs and have them trained then we dont have to worry about the minimum wage as much because minimum wage is minimum skills. When you fur hire somebody, you dont know what their capabilities are. You have to spend a lot of Time Training them for the work that theyre doing, and when you increase the minimum wage, it increases everybodys salary. I mean, you cant put the lowest one up above the next one in skill level. So it escalates everything. And thats good provided the business can afford to do that, that they have the economy to do that. Ive got to see that the tax cuts and jobs act did help the economy a little bit. It blossomed the economy. Yes, sir. And i had a little bit of a role in that. And so i i get a little upset anybody mentions the 1. 5 trillion deficit. That was as if that bill would make no difference in the economy. Thats how that scored. We all that it would make some difference and it has made a difference. Last year there was more revenue coming into this country from taxes than there had been any previous year, and now this year were beating last year. Of course some of the overseas money is starting to come in. So there are a number of things that pay into these play into these things and one of them, of course, is job training, and the last two states in the nation to get a job Core Training Center were New Hampshire and wyoming. We both have Job Training Centers now. And i think theyre making a difference. So what are your ideas and priorities for what youd like to accomplish in terms of job training . And does the job core fit into your vision of such training . Senator, briefly on the subject of the economy and the minimum wage, yes, weve been talking today about the minimum wage a bit, but as you know, there are other factors that sometimes are even more important to the wellbeing of American Workers and how well jobs pay. Right now were in part because of the act that you mentioned we are looking at virtually record low unemployment, record low unemployment for africanamericans, hispanics, were looking at more than a year of 3 wage growth and people at the lower end of the wage scale are enjoying some of the biggest benefits. So it is important to enforce the minimum wage law but we shouldnt lose sight of the changes that weve seen in our economy as part partly as a result of this president s policies. With respect to job core, that is an important responsibility of the department of labour. You and i spoke about a new center that you have near the Wind River Range and i think, again, that is a number of different ways that the Labor Department helps workers, but also helps americas productivity by matching interested, willing workers with businesses that have the kinds that have the need for the kinds of talents that theyre bringing. Thank you. And wyoming had some people that invented something called climb wyoming, which is for single moms to get nontraditional jobs, and theyre driving driving trucks and managing warehouses. And the programs are being copied by a number of other states now. My time is expired and senator rosen. Thank you. Thank you, senator enzi, and thank you, mr. Scalia, for your willingness to serve and meeting with me yesterday. My pleasure. I enjoyed meeting with you as well. I want to talk a little bit about nevada and nevadas test site where were responsible for the partial integrity of our nuclear arsenal. So the department of energy employs occupational illness compensation program. What it does is provide services to former Energy Employees like nevadas Nuclear Test Site workers and compensation for workrelated illnesses developed as a result of an exposure to radiation and toxic substances. These hardworking americans have sacrificed and served our country by working at test sites and other locations that are essential to defending our nation from attack. So i have a deeper question, so im just going to ask this yes or no. Are you aware of this program at the department of labor . I am. I think it used to go by the name of its a hard acronym. I couldnt spell that acronym, but i think i can pronounce it, but it was a program that was having some problems. Yeah. When i was at the department before. I dont know how its doing before well, let me finish and im going to ask a question about working on it and maybe making it better. So i understand from our Home Health Care workers in nevada that changes to implemented by the department earlier this year have made it harder for former atomic and Energy Workers to get their claims processed and to access the benefits to help them afford their health care because of these because of their prior working conditions. So what i really want to do is ask you if youll commit to looking at this program, working to streamline the claims, the approval process and specifically implementing an electronic claim so that Energy Workers, many of them who are so sick, theyre aging, they have chronic pain, they really need to get the care that they need. Senator, i am not familiar with the particular problem that youre referring to, but i would be interested in reviewing it, studying it more, and if im confirmed and working with you to address it. I do recognize that there are some Labor Department programs that are not as attuned as they could be to changes in our economy and changes in how people communicate, how they access and submit information. There are other Program Areas where we would benefit and i think have tried to benefit by greater reliance on electronic communications. I look forward to streaming steam lining that for you to benefit their care. I want to move on quickly to workforce and apresenprenticesh. I know theyve been touched on here before. Registered apprenticeships very popular. In nevada, as i mentioned in our meeting yesterday, we have more than 20 billion of Construction Projects in the Southern Nevada area alone. Our carpenters, our electricians have very robust Training Programs response what we need to work on are those nationally recognized credentials. Apprenticeships strengthen our economy, create pathways to goodpaying careers and meet our countrys demand in middle skilled jobs. So for all those reasons its troubling to mean that the administration is not supporting the registered apprenticeship programs. The president only requested 160 million, only a small increase, and we need to help our businesses develop these skills so we can continue to grow our communities. The department has failed to properly staff the program. Six state office apresencprenti positions are vacant, including one in nevada. So if confirmed will you commit to properly staffing, to increasing the staffing and to working on promoting these registered apprenticeships that will really build our nations economy . Senator, the apprenticeship programs are i think very important to our president. Hes made it an area of emphasis. There has been interagency interest within the executive branch in looking at ways to improve apprenticeship programs, and as youre noting there is an ongoing rule making. There is a vacancy in nevada. I have 24 billion in Construction Projects. I need some more apprenticeship programs. I can commit if im confirmed, senator, to take a look at that because this administration is interested and supportive of these programs, and if theres a vacancy causing a shortfall there, thats something if im confirmed id like to take a look at and see if we can address it. Thank you. Ill yield the chair back to the chairman and also yield any additional time in case i dont make it back. Thank you, senator enzi, and thank you for chairing the economy. Senat senator, are you ready . Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you to Ranking Member murray as well. Thank you, mr. Scalia, for being here today. Congratulations on your nomination. Thank you. Thank you for meeting with me earlier this week. I just want to thank your family, too. Public service is a Family Affair and a Family Commitment and im grateful for your familys commitment to Public Service. I wanted to just start on the issue again of the rights of workers with disabilities. Weve had a little bit of a discussion about it. Throughout your career in a number of cases you have represented companies that denied workers with disabilities needed accommodations. In a letter to senator ted kennedy during your nomination to be the Labor Department solicitor in 2001, you named one particular disability case, eeoc versus u. P. S. As in the top five most important legal issues you had worked on. This case was ultimately used to narrow the american with disabilities act and its protections for workers with disabilities by permitting employers to limit employment based on perceived abilities. I will note in the discussion about 14c that you just had with senator kaine, thats a little bit of what were trying to get at. New hampshire was the first state in the country to repeal the subminimum wage for people with disabilities. Which ill note we did because the Business Community came forward and said this was not right or fair. It was, again, about prejudging people with their disabilities and their capacity, something i think we have been trying to change over time. So in the case of your private law practice and the u. P. S. Case that i just cited, i know that you were representing your client as a lawyer, but today id like to know your personal views, because i think thats relevant should you become secretary of labor. Do you believe that workers with disabilities are entitled to accommodations in the workplace . And if so, can you provide an example of the kind of accomodation you think theyre entitled to . Senator, i appreciate how important these issues are to you and the work that youve done, including with respect to 14c, and if im confirmed i would welcome the opportunity to speak with you about it further because as i think we discussed, i see this as an area where people across the aisle historically have found ways to Work Together. As you know, the americans with disabilities act was signed by president george h. W. Bush. Thats right. With respect to accommodations, of course the law does require Workplace Accommodations and i think that they are a good thing for the workers and for business as well. There are a range of different things, as you know, that can beappropriabe appropriate accommodations. For example, you see accommodations for people who need a wheelchair to get about to work more productively in the workplace. At times there can be accommodations to help people who have hearing problems to function fully in the workplace. Theres a range of things. And i would like to talk briefly about that eeoc case you mentioned, but i want to emphasize, too, i have spent a fair amount of time with clients explaining to them both the legal obligations they have under the ada but also ways that they can satisfy them. Because a lot of managers, shoplevel managers think i cant do that. Right. Thats impossible. Or weve never done that. So lets move on just a second because im limited in time and i appreciate that answer. I also want to touch on the issue of disability claims in terms of systemic discrimination because you have also argued that such claims brought by a class of workers with disability are not suitable for class action because each case requires individual proof, and you mentioned in your answer to senator collins that you had represented clients pro bono that needed representation when they felt that their disability was impacting their treatment in the workplace. I would like to make sure that clients dont have to go finding a lawyer who will be willing to represent them pro bone know. If there is systemic discrimination, i would like the department of labor and its leadership to really move to eliminate a system of discrimination. So can you give me your thoughts on not in your past representing clients but about the role of investigations concerning systemic disability discrimination . This is an area that is the responsibility of the eeoc to a great extent, as you know. I do think that in areas where its difficult for one reason or another for individuals to come together and bling bring a clas action, there may be a greater demand on the federal government to step in. When i was at the Labor Department before, an area of emphasis for me was low wage and immigrant workers. I met with my staff to work on ways to change those programs to better address those conditions because i believed those were people among those most likely to be victimized and least likely to address it. I think in circumstances where class actions are harder to brick because of the Supreme Courts rulings and because of the rules that govern them, there may be a greater demand on the government. And as you know at the Labor Department we have what we have is an office dedicated to helping with research and in some circumstances outreach and education on accommodating people with disabilities. Thank you. I notice youre well over time. Thank you for your indulgence, mr. Chair, and thank you, mr. Scalia. Thank you, senator hassan. Senator jones . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Scalia, for being here, your willingness to serve and also for the visit yesterday. I would like to revisit a couple of questions asked by senator murphy and senator kaine regarding protections for lgbtq individuals in this country, because, quite frankly, i think were kind of dancing around the heart of the matter. Right now there are three Supreme Court cases in front of the court that will be heard in october concerning discrimination in the workplace for lgbtq individuals. The eeoc said the Civil Rights Act of 1964 guarantees protections from Workplace Discrimination for lgbtq individuals. The Trump Administration, as i understand it, has taken a different approach and said that that cannot you cannot read the 64 act to apply to discrimination based on Sexual Orientation. What is your position . Youre not were not here as a judge, like your dad was. What is your position with regard to the Civil Rights Act and whether or not it can protect those lgbtq employees from discrimination based on their Sexual Orientation . Senator, this is an area where, as i think youre suggesting, to a significant extent the Supreme Court has stepped in and spoken and established certain parameters, and then when it relighates particularly to the Labor Department, president obama amended the order regarding discrimination to the lgbtq and President Trump has reaffirmed his commitment to that. That is a law that i would have, if im confirmed, responsibility for enforcing and that i would not hesitate to do so. With respect to the cases that are now in the Supreme Court, i think that the department of justice has taken one position. I dont know currently what position is being staked out by the eeoc, but i dont believe that the department of labor has been called to present its views in it because its not a statute administered by the department. Again, focussing on the statutes administered by the department and the executive order, as i said back in that college piece, prejudice is abhorrent. I agree with that. Its not something that ive tolerated in my workplace. And i would vigorously enforce the laws and my responsibility as secretary if i were confirmed in that important area. Well, i appreciate that. I am concerned, though, that from a private sector that the should these cases not go the way that i think they should go then lgbtq folks are going to be without any real enforcement and under the law. So what im what im concerned about, if you couple that with the administrations proposed religious exemption rul rules, which i believe gives folks under using federal tax dollars the right to discriminate folks, what do you believe what is your view on that issue and the religious exemption right now . Because we times have changed a lot. Weve had the overfell decision, but weve also had hobby lobby, and i think people can hide behind that. Im all about religious freedom. I really am. But i dont want that religious freedom to be used to discriminate against people in the workplace, and im afraid that the proposed rule with the department of labor and the administration is going to do just that. And so how do you reconcile those two . Senator, i think your question began by asking about the cases in the Supreme Court, and, you know, well see what the court decides. Precisely who to protect from discrimination in the workplace or elsewhere often ultimately is a decision to be made by congress. Or states and locales. And the executive branch and the department of labor can provide a role in helping members of Congress Make that decision and then if the Supreme Court doesnt address these issues in a way that members of this committee or members of the senate think is appropriate and legislation is enacted then, again, thats an Important Role for us to make sure its enforced. With regard to the rule making that you mentioned, this is, senator, an ongoing rule making within the Labor Department concerning federal contractors who are religious organizations. And as i understand it, it seeks to update the existing rule to protect religious rights in a man more similar to the way thats done under the law enacted by congress, title vii. I read a letter i believe submitted by the Committee Earlier this week. If confirmed, im going to take a careful look at that rule making to make sure that we get that balance right between our interest in protecting religious liberty on the one hand and on the other hand not discriminating improperly on other grounds. All right. Thank you, mr. Scalia. Mr. Chairman, i would like to add that i appreciate congress role. Unfortunately, the way the senate of the United States is operating right now, we dont do anything unless the administration expresses a willingness to sign it and sign on, so i would urge if you are confirmed to help regard and make sure that protections for lgbtq people are across the Board Private and public. Thank you so much. Thank you, senator jones. Mr. Scalia, weve except for my questions, which ill ask in a minute, weve completed one round of questions, and i will stay in case senators have a second round of questions. But let me let me ask a few and then ill turn to senator murray and then well see what other senators may come back. There have been a number of allusions to your representation of clients and the clients views. Youve practiced law for a prominent law firm for a long time. Youve probably represented some clients who were pretty good people or my experience with law practice is people who are in real trouble, and we have a very good lawyer over here, trial lawyer, defense lawyer, senator jones. Hes probably represented some real scoundrels in his day because thats mostly politicians. Theyve needed a really good lawyer, and if im not mistaken when he was elected to the United States senate, he was the president of the National Trial lawyers or something no, it was the District Attorney u. S. Attorney. What was it . National association of former u. S. Attorneys. But hes such a good prosecutor that people in trouble, ill bet, have come to him to to get out of trouble. One of my earliest lessons in United States history was about john adams who was president of the United States. Before he was president of the United States he was a lawyer in boston. If i remember right, he represented a british colonist who had murdered or killed a british soldier. Which had to be a very unpopular thing to do in the midst of the American Revolution. I wonder if president adams representation of a british soldier who had killed an american colonist i wonder if youd want to reflect on that story in American History and talk about your representation of so many clients over a period of time and the difference between your views as secretary of labor and what your views might be as a very effective advocate. Well, yes, with respect to john adams, you know, i should say i was blessed with an extraordinary father but with an extraordinary mother, too. Whos boston irish and loved john adams. And i lived in virginia and she didnt care much for George Washington or thomas jefferson, but i learned a lot about john adams and samuel adams. And other things, by the way. As i say, my mom was boston irish. I remember growing up as a kid and my mom telling me there used to be signs when she was a kid no irish. That was part of my upbringing, my mother irish, telling me about the kind of blatant, shameless, overt discrimination that she witnessed as a kid. But, yeah, i learned about john adams and that story which youve mentioned, chairman ac alexander, is one of the Great Stories in American History. The boston massacre was a terrible event. It was a seminal event in the American Revolution and john adams did a deeply unpopular thing of representing these british soldiers and getting their acquittal. Its a wonderful story about the bar, about lawyers and their obligations, sometimes their obligation to do things that they disagree with, and i im proud to have had the representations that ive had in the business world. And have represent my clients zealously, but youre absolutely right that i am not necessarily my clients. I will seek to defend them, to vindicate their rights, but that doesnt mean that i necessarily think that what they did was proper or that i well, i would assume that some of your clients came to you because they were in trouble, is that right . Thats thats usually why you i mean, you dont just have a lawyer to lunch at x hundred dollars an hour when everythings going fine. Sadly they werent coming just because they liked me. And as ive suggested earlier, part of that relationship with my clients is theres whats what im doing in court and defending their rights and addressing what their rights are under the law, but on the other hand there can be a separate conversation sometimes with the client where i know and maybe they know that there was something done that was wrong and we need to find a way to fix that, and thats part of my responsibility, and a part of my job that i cherished. And then finally, of course, ive had the United States government as a client before. This would be my fourth time in government. Including as the principal Law Enforcement officer for the department of labor, and of the clients that you can have, thats the most important, thats the weightiest and gravest responsibility. It meant a great deal to me when i was solicitor. And if i were confirmed i would certainly be so mindful of the special duties that come when youre representing the United States government and when youre looking out for people who lack the means to care for themselves. Thank you for your answer. Well now begin a second round of questions and ill go in a minute to senator murray. Ive noticed over the last several years and really been concerned, and this is not a republican or democrat issue, but the what if youre an effective lawyer, youre going to be representing a lot of people you dont start out by representing people whose views agree with yours. There are certain ethical responsibilities lawyers have, but you represent people who have a right to be heard, to get justice before the bar, and in our society we need to remember the story of john adams and the british and the british soldier whom he represented. Thats an important part of our system of justice in this country. Everyones entitled to a fair hearing and very effective advocacy now because of Supreme Court rulings. And i dont i dont like to see nominees or lawyers who arent nominees criticized for effectively representing people who have different views than someone else. Senator murray, your turn. Well, thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Scalia, back in 2001 when you appeared before this committee for your nomination as solicitor, i asked you a question about the pervasive problem of workplace harassment, and, unfortunately, little has improved over the last 18 years. Over the past two years of the me too movement, countless women and men have come forward to share their stories, and ive heard from Domestic Workers and Hotel Housekeepers and fast food workers and many others about the harassment theyve faced in their workplace and how much they feared coming forward. And i believe we have to do better. Earlier this year i introduced the be heard in the workplace act to help prevent and address workplace harassment and ensure that all workers are treated fairly and with dignity. Now, as i mentioned in my opening remarks, you have represented corporations that defended against allegations of rampant harassment. The Ford Motor Company against more than 30 female workers alleging Sexual Harassment and retaliation at the Chicago Assembly plant. Women there reported unwanted touching, unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and attempted rape. So many women never speak out about harassment in the workplace because theyre afraid of being fired. So im really glad those women did speak out and speak up about their experience in the workplace, and i wanted to ask you, do you agree that the laws and regulations on the books today are too weak to actually adequately protect workers from harassment and discrimination at work . Madam Ranking Member, we spoke yesterday when we met about Sexual Harassment in the workplace. I know what an important issue it is to you, and i have, as you mentioned, spent a number of years in the field of labor and employment among other things dealing with issues of harassment. I was struck and disappointed, too, as the me too movement took off with the extent of mistreatment that we learned about at different workplaces. So it is and continues to be a problem. Its one that in my practice i have helped clients try to address, helped them improve their discrimination policies, help them improve their policies regarding respecting whistleblowers or those who have reported a potential harassment. As i said in my opening, ive had some very Difficult Conversations with clients where theyve wanted to and i appreciate that experience, and you did speak to it, but i just wanted to ask, in that experience do you think our laws are Strong Enough to protect workers or do you agree that we need to strengthen our laws so that they have protections in place today . I think that, honestly, senator, i think that we do have some strong, important protections in place. I think that education on those protections sometimes is needed. I do believe that it is important to have vigorous enforcement of the rights of women and others against harassment, and then if the congress were to conclude that even more tools were needed and the Labor Department were to be to become involved in that, i would certainly but you would not lead any efforts or speak out in any efforts to do that, which really concerns me because in my experience the Current System is very ineffective if i could just respond to that briefly, senator. Legislatively, i if i were confirmed, i would view my job as following Congress Lead and if new laws were enacted, to enforce them, but as secretary there are things that i could do and will look into doing yeah. As relates ill just say, many of your general answers have been ill follow the law. Obviously we expect any secretary to do that. Often times our secretaries need to step up and say our laws are not effective enough or encourage legislation. I hope you would think about that as well. I only have a few seconds left in my second take your time. I wanted to ask you about the fiduciary rule because a lot of our economy has really shifted from traditional pension where the risk is on the employer for retirement plans in 401 k s where workers face all the risk. Yet, these savers who needed help figuring out their investments are surprised to learn that professional advisers today are under no obligation to put the needs of savers and their Families First and that costs families billions of dollars annually. So the Obama Administration worked to help Retirement Savers get Investment Advice that was free from conflicts of interest. You have been an outspoken critic of that common sense protection. Youve called it a regulatory god godzilla. Even after several courts upheld the decision, youve fought to get it overturned. So i just want to ask you a simple question. Do you think families who are seeking professional Investment Advice about their Retirement Savings deserve advice that is in their best interest . I do think that they should be able to seek that advice, and, senator knife. And know when they get it its in their interests and not the person advising them . I think that should be available and informed of the nature of the advice theyre receiving and if there are conflicts. This is a case as chairman and i were discussing earlier, i was retained by clients to address a rule that was it was a controversial rule. Thankfully the securities and Exchange Commission has now stepped in and itself adopted whats called a best interest standard with respect to broker dealers who are folks that ordinarily are regulated directly by the s. E. C. But, again, having worked at the department before, im very mindful of the special role the department has in protecting pensions and workers retirements. Youve had a lot of work done on this in overturning the rule. Would you recuse yourself from participating in dols revised judiciary rule because of that . As you know there are federal ethics rules that will govern what matters that i can work on when im at the department where there might have been some prior connection on my part or the part of my firm or a client,y so in the case of the fiduciary rule i would seek guidance from the designated Agency Ethics official that the department of labor regarding what my ability to participate would be. Okay. And one final on this. Youre obviously being nominated to lead the department of labor, which congress explicitly selected to oversee retirement Investment Advice. In the wake of the stud a hig level of protection for Retirement Savings than investments overseen by the s. E. C. Yet, you have suggested that the department of labor should allow the s. E. C. To oversee the fiduciary rule. Thats iconic considering you spent a significant amount of your career attacking the s. E. C. Rules. If youre confirmed secretary of labor, do you intend to cede authority to the s. E. C. . If confirmed, i would not cede responsibility to the s. E. C. I engaged in some vigorous actions as solicitor to help protect the right of retirees to their pensions. I mentioned the enron Pension Plans, and actions that i took there. I worked particularly closely, actually, with some of the lawyers in that office at the Labor Department and know how important that that mission of the department is. I will say that Labor Departments mission, although very important, is focused on employment Retirement Savings, and one of the concerns that was raised by the fiduciary rule is that they were actually treading on the s. E. C. s jurisdiction. So i think part of what is necessary in the government is making sure that there is the proper balance between the different regulatory authorities, and i would want to if im confirmed work with the s. E. C. If necessary to strike that balance correctly. Thank you. Thank you for the additional time. I would ask for unanimous consent, mr. Chairman, to enter 16 letters into the record expressing concern or opposition to confirmation. As so ordered. As a courtesy to the witness we are going to take a fiveminute break before we proceed with a second round of questions. Ill be glad to stay here as long as senators would like. The committee is in recess for five minutes. Thank you, senator murray. Well continue with our second round of questions. Senator casey . Mr. Chairman, thanks very much. Mr. Scalia, i know youve had a long morning and just have a couple of followup questions. Ill try to be brief in the Interest Rate of time for our colleagues as well. Senator kaine had asked you about employment of americans with disabilities, and i wont ill follow up with you later, but i was hopeful that maybe thats something that if you were to be confirmed that you could Work Together with us on. The particular issue is competitive integrative integrated employment. I have the leading bill on this in the senate and i hope we can talk more about that. Also on the question of disability claims and what happens in the workplace, obviously department of labor plays a big role in that. The United Parcels service case that senator baldwin referred to and others, i have real concerns about how you might approach issues that were involved in a case like that, which did narrow the protections for workers under the americans with disabilities act. So ill be following up with you on that. I wanted to ask you in particular, and im going back to the issue of what happens to one category of workers, coal miners. The black Lung Disability trust fund is running out of money to cover the cost of both health and disability benefits for coal miners with black lung disease. The department of labor administers claims filed under the black lung benefits act. And id ask you just a simple question, do you believe that Coal Companies that benefit from the hard labor of those miners should be responsible for paying the health and disability benefits for those miners that develop black lung disease, which is unfortunately on the rise now . Senator casey, i share your hope that if im so lucky as to be confirmed that the ability for folks with disabilities to participate more fully in the workplace is something that we might Work Together on. I think as we discussed earlier, there are reasons for people of sort of all stripes of views and beliefs to want to help and Work Together and make that happen, and so id welcome the chance to contribute to that. I feel i should respond briefly on the eeoc case thats been mentioned a couple of times. That was a matter i was handling for a client. I wasnt, that i can recall, personally seeking to make any significant change with respect to the americans with disabilities act. The federal government had brought this case against my client. It was seeking to force u. P. S. To hire drivers for somewhat heavy trucks who had vision out of only one eye, and u. P. S. Had some safety concerns and there were federal rules saying that to drive a good sized truck it was important to have vision out of both eyes. So i was just defending them in the case but i wasnt seeking to make any significant change in the law. Finally with respect to coal miners, i confess that i would need to study more fully the exact parameters of the obligations that Coal Companies currently have to their workers, but my understanding is that they are currently obligated to make contributions to fund its a lot smaller. Thats why the trust fund has run out of money. I would say on both issues, and i know were short on time, i realize that as a lawyer in private practice you have clients that you represent and youve got to represent them zealously. But youre going to be wearing a different hat if youre nominated if youre confirmed. And just to say, well, i hope we can Work Together on that or i cant comment on a bill or i cant you can be in this position an advocate, in both your advocacy, your point of view, your attitude about these issues matters, and i would hope i would hope that if youre confirmed that you would act like a champion not just business as usual. And the reason i mentioned the ada, its about more than a quarter of a century old and there are two problems of it. Number one, we havent achieved the goals of the americans with disabilities act. Nowhere close in large measure. And number two is, there are constant hits that are taking place over time that are undermining the goals of the act so we need champions in both parties, in both branches. Thats all id say and i know im out of time but thank you. Thank you. Thank you, senator casey. Senator murphy . I thank you, mr. Chairman, for the opportunity for a second round. I wholeheartedly agree with senator casey. Obviously your chief responsibility is to enforce and implement the law, but good secretaries are also advocates for change in the law when they think that we can do better, and you obviously will have a lot of decisions to make about priorities when you get there. One area of law in which the prior secretary was an advocate on was the issue of Mental Health parity. This is the law that requires our Insurance Companies to treat Mental Health coverage just like they treat coverage for all sorts of other conditions. The president s commission, President Trumps commission on combatting drug addiction and the Opioid Crisis called on the department to aggressively enforce the Mental Health parity and addiction act and it suggested additional authorities be given to the department of labor, which the secretary acosta agreed with. In fact, asked this committee for more additional audit abilities and civil monetary Penalty Authority for violations of the law. Maybe i wont ask you to, you know, weigh in specifically on those recommendations, but i think we were really making some progress until secretary acostas departure in trying to get this congress to give the department more authority, and i just want to get your confirmation that you will be, you know, an active participant in what in the work that the department of labor can do to combat the drug addiction crisis and the Mental Health crisis in this country. You have an active role to play to make sure that Insurance Companies dont continue to be part of the problem. I would welcome that opportunity. Senator, i had a good conversation, among others, with senator smith, too, about these issues. And when i speaking to her i think i mentioned that as i look at people that i know that are struggling with medical problems often these days. Its not i broke my leg on the job or something of that nature, although that still happens. It is difficulties with Substance Abuse or depression or the like. Its i agree that its very important that we not slight the needs that people have in that area or treat them as less worthy of attention than other kinds of illness or injury. And then with respect to opioids, particularly, its a national crisis. Im well aware of the role that the Labor Department can play. I think its been doing some good things. I had some good conversations as i was getting briefed by personnel at the department. Some good conversations about some programs that are in the works and thats an area that, again, there is room for consensus and cooperation because there are ways to help these people with opioid addiction better than were doing, and i think the Labor Department has made some strides in its Workers Compensation program, but also there is business wants to help because this is one of the reasons we have a skills gap right now. Well, you know, we just all know that when you go to access a Mental Health benefit or an addiction benefit, you go through all sorts of hoops that you do not have to go through if youre getting reimbursement for an orthopedic procedure. Thats a violation of the law and the department of labor can help us clarify that. Second, mr. Scalia, the Eastern Connecticut Manufacturing Pipeline Initiative is an example of these innovative efforts that are happening all around the country to try to make sure that we are ready for all of the new defense jobs that we are funding. We have a Defense Industrial based workforce crisis in this country. You dont have a lot of experience in Workforce Development but thats a big part of your job, and it is vital that the department of labor, the department of defense and state and local governments partner together to make sure that as were building more submarines and more ships, more landbased military vehicles, that we have the workforce to fill those roles. There is just no way to do that without the department of labor playing an active role. We couldnt have gotten that partnership off the ground in connecticut. Which has had a 92 job placement rate without the department of labor. Secretary acosta came to connecticut, spent a day looking at the partnership, i think was very impressed by it. I would invite you to do the same, but i would also love to know this will be a focus of yours because it will be a crisis in this country if we cant meet that workforce need. I welcome the chance to visit, senator, if im confirmed and i am deeply appreciative and even more so having come through this process now of the role the department of labor does play in sustaining programs like what you just described. Thank you, senator murray murphy. I was thinking of calling on senator murray, but thank you, senator murphy. Senator murray, do you have any other comments or questions youd like to make . Mr. Chairman, i think there were several members of our side who wanted to come back with additional questions but were unable to, so i know that they will have questions theyll submit for the record. I will as well on a number of topics i want to get Additional Information from the nominee and i would really seriously hope we get those back in a timely fashion so we can all have the information we need in moving this forward. Thank you again. Thank you, mr. Scalia, for being here. Thank you to your very large family for sitting behind you for a very long time. Thank you so much. Thank you, senator murray. I want to thank my colleagues for conducting a confirmation hearing that included vigorous questioning of the nominee, which one would expect for someone from who has been nominated by any president for secretary of labor. There are probably no set of issues about which we have more different opinions politically than on labor issues, but with treating the nominee with the kind of respect that a president ial nominee should have. So i thank my colleagues for that. I thank senator murray and her staff and our staff for the professional way theyve conducted the various discussions we have in connection with the nomination. Mr. Scalia has been its been two months since the president made known his intent to nominate mr. Scalia. Weve had all of his records sent for three weeks. We will weve had good questions today. And well vote next tuesday. I wont have any further questions except to make a couple of comments. To make a couple of comments. One is, there are opportunities as senator murphy indicated despite our political differences to get some pretty good results. We often do it on the committee. Senator murphy has been a part of that with Mental Health parity. I hope you will take those opportunities seriously. Senator murray and i are regularly looking for areas of agreement where we can move ahead. We cant do anything in the Senate Unless we have bipartisan agreement. Sometimes we get it and usually when we do, were in the middle of it. So i would encourage you to continue your visits with democratic as well as republican members of this committee and identify areas where the administration and members of the committee could work on. For my part, i hope youll take a look at Association Health plans. We have big differences on obamacare. But people who make more than 50,000 a year in tennessee, theyre paying through the nose for their Health Insurance. The Association Health plans are a help for that. Theres a rule that secretary costa put out that was stopped by federal court, but the inspe independent agency that reviews Health Insurance estimated that this kind of coverage could help as many as three or four million americans reduce their insurance premiums by about a third. Now, a third of a 20,000 a year insurance bill is a lot of money. Its several thousand dollars. This is not junk insurance. This is insurance of the kind that the Big Companies have. Its insurance that includes preexisting condition and those sorts of benefits. So the whole point of it is, if its good enough for ibm, why isnt it good enough for the Small Business. I would encourage you not to try and push the envelope as far as you can and get overruled by the courts. My piano teacher used to tell me at a recital play it a little slower than you can play it. If you can get a rule or enforcement out there thats clearly within the law, go ahead and take that opportunity because there are lots of people in las vegas for example in Small Business who are already signed up. There are many in tennessee who would like to sign up. Id like to see Association Health plans go as far as they can within the law. Same for the overtime rule. There was bipartisan concern about the earlier decision. So i hope that you will enforce that and come up with that in a way that is within the law. May not go as far as somebody would like, for example, penopl at the office of management and budget. They may want to push you a little further. You dont need to go that far. Id like to see you play it a little slower than you can play and get a rule on overtime and Association Health plan and enforcement of that area thats clearly within the law and actually helps people. The questions for the record will be due at 5 00 p. M. Tomorrow. The hearing record will remain open for ten days. Members may submit Additional Information for the record at that time if they would like. Mr. Scalia, i thank you for being here today and answering all the questions the senators had. We would expect the answers to their additional questions to be here by the time we vote on next tuesday. The committee will stand adjourned. Thank you. If you missed any of our live coverage of this event, it will be available to view online shortly at cspan. Org. Just type Eugene Scalia into the video search box at the top of our home page. Join us tomorrow when President Trump and Melania Trump will host australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison at the white house. Well show you the arrivals as well as the dinner toast. Also, former white house social secretary and former chief of protocol will join us in the studio to take an indepth look at President Trumps second state dinner. Watch that live tomorrow at 6 30 p. M. Over on cspan, online at cspan. Org or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Weve got more campaign 2020 this weekend when 18 of the democratic president ial candidates will speak at in des moines iowa. Watch our live coverage saturday 2 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Also, join us sunday for q and a. This weeks guest is kay coles james. Saturday on book tv, at 11 00 p. M. Eastern in their new book the education of Brett Kavanagh New York Times reporters explore justice Brett Kavanaghs past. Then on sunday at 10 00 a. M. Eastern, live coverage of the 2019 brooklyn book festival, featuring a discussion on the Trump Administration with Annette Gordon reed and historian historian brenda wineapple. And a look at historical resistance with deray mckesen. Then in his latest book power grab Jason Chaffetz argues that liberals are trying to undermine the trump presidency. They really do believe on that radical far left side, they throw all these labels like fascist and all these really negative terms on donald trump, but what i see them doing is exactly what they claim the president was doing, that in order to protect our freedom, they need to take it away, in order to make sure the First Amendment is in place, they need to take away our rights under the First Amendment. Its just a recurring theme. At 9 00 journalist Michelle Malkin discusses her thoughts and her book open bordered incorporated. Tim cook and jeff bezos have donated to many of these deep pocketed nonprofit organizations that are crusading for illegal alien rights. You wonder how it is that they have instant representation in court to sue over every last Trump Initiative to enforce the law. So big business and the u. S. Chamber of commerce are a huge reason for that. Watch book tv every weekend on cspan 2. This weekend on American History tv, saturday at 6 00 p. M. Eastern on the civil war, scott mingus coauthor of targeted tracks talks about the importance of the couple ber land valley railroad. The things that are mow v motivating August Wilson are his desire to move black people to the center. And sunday at 4 00 p. M. Eastern on reel america, the 1919 silent army film motor convoy about a transcontinental trek from Washington State to San Francisco 49er San Francisco. Hoover built the crb to a remarkable organization. It had its own flag. It had its own fleet. It negotiate what had you might call treaties with some of the warring european powers. Its leader, hoover, enjoyed diplomatic immunity and traveled freely through enemy lines, probably the only american citizen permitted to do so during the entire war. Explore our nations past on American History tv every weekend on cspan 3. Now the Senate Commerce committee looks into digital platforms efforts to identify and remove violent extremist content. Representatives from google, facebook, twitter and the Antidefamation League testified. They discussed extremist behavior and how the Major Companies are trying to combat this through content using reporting, artificial intelligence, Law Enforcement tools and information sharing between companies. From yesterday, this is just over two hours and five minu