I thank everyone here for giving serious consideration to amendment No. 24 to H.R. 4502. Madam Speaker, I speak today with my colleagues to support an expansion that was done under the last administration that has had a profound and positive effect on apprenticeships. {time} 1715 The amendment would simply allow funding to be available for the implementation of the Department of Labor's Industry-Recognized Apprenticeship Programs, otherwise known as IRAP. In 2017, former President Trump acted to enhance the skills and training options for all Americans so they may compete in today's jobs. IRAP expanded high-quality apprenticeship programs with a focus on rapidly growing industries like healthcare and STEM-based positions. IRAP apprenticeships were unique from the traditional government programs in that they were designed to be more nimble and responsive to the changing workforce that we find ourselves in today. Engaging in learning with new programs doesn't fit the old model, and the IRAP expansion is extremely important for the following reason. I support the apprenticeship programs that all of us are familiar with, the skilled trades and the like; but, in fact, today there are new skills that are being developed in which the curriculum must be nimble and must change. In just 4 months of operation, the program had 131 new offerings in the healthcare field alone.…
Share & report
More from Darrell Issa
In closing, I urge passage of this bill, I recommend that all Members vote ``yes,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.
Don Young has 50 years of stories, and I will tell you just one in 20 seconds. Madam Speaker, Don Young, faced with a young Member wanting to affect bypass mail in Alaska, could have dressed me down and told me over his dead body. Instead…
When I received my current district in redistricting, I was pleased that it was a border district, all along the Mexican border from the Tijuana area all the way through the rest of the county. It isn't a border area today. There is no…
Listening to the initial debate here, you would believe that there was a legitimate difference of opinion here on the floor about protecting the Justices. Clearly, there was no such difference in the U.S. Senate. What there is, though, is…





