Sharosh Rajasekher, Unsplash Editor’s note: This is the first of a two-part series on West Virginia’s new Higher Education Future Workforce Grant Program. The authors offer competing perspectives, and the purpose of this short series is to foster a robust debate about what state governments should (or should not) do to ensure that the next generation of Americans has the tools they need to succeed in the workplace.
Centrally planning a state or regional workforce, any anti-socialist can tell you, is a bad idea. The economy moves faster than planners can plan, data look backward instead of forward, and prices and wages over time do a better job of balancing the supply and demand for labor than a bureaucrat full of data could achieve. So, should a state workforce board that picks winners and losers even exist?
Well, West Virginia has a Workforce Development Board, and there’s a person on the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission who has final responsibility for picking winners and losers among occupations.
There’s a person…who has final responsibility for picking winners and losers among occupations.This isn’t West Virginia’s fault. Congress forces states to have workforce development boards (or the equivalent under another name) if they want federal funds under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). What is more, Congress requires that each local area have its own soviet—officially known as a local workforce development board.
In West Virginia, each soviet has its own standards and processes for picking winners and losers among occupations. The local winners are known as “demand occupations.” This designation qualifies them for workforce education programs under the state’s new Higher Education Future Workforce Grant Program (HEFWGP). For example, in Region VI, a “demand occupation” (not the same as an “in-demand” one) must have “a minimum of 25 projected openings and/or 25 replacement openings on the current list of Long-Term West Virginia Demand Occupations for Workforce Area 6” or meet a different stated criterion.
The HEFWGP, which the West Virginia Legislature established in its 2026 regular session, offers a student up to $2,000 per year for the costs of enrollment in a short-term (12 months or less) workforce education program designed to fulfill the need for a “demand occupation.” The student applicant must have already applied for federal aid, including Pell Grants.
West Virginia’s HEFWGP differs from traditional Pell Grants (which can be for multi-year programs) and from short-term Pell Grants (which are limited to programs of 8–15 weeks). It also does not require education programs to be of high quality. Short-term Pell requires each credential to have a completion rate of 70% and to be portable (usable by multiple employers) and stackable (part of a larger system of credentials in the same line of work). The HEFWGP does not.
Do you want to study to become a phlebotomy technician at BridgeValley Community and Technical College? Good news: It’s on the list and requires just 50 hours in the classroom and 120 clinical hours. Can you guess why it costs exactly $2,000?
Or do you want your Surface Mine Apprentice Certification? More good news: You can get HEFWGP money to study for it (the 40-hour program appears to cost just $250) at Southern West Virginia Community and Technical College.
A great advantage of short-term workforce programs is that someone can quickly get in and out at a low cost and be ready for a higher wage. Anyone who understands that markets really work, however, should strongly prefer private-sector solutions over government programs. In Ohio, for instance, proposed legislation includes a strong policy of public-private partnerships, “qualified education partnerships,” whereby the private sector invests in developing a portable, stackable, high-quality workforce education program in partnership with a local college. For each successful employee produced—even if the employee works for a business competitor—the company earns $1,000. The company also receives a tax credit for 20% of its development expenses. (OK, that’s not entirely a free-market solution, but it’s a lot closer to the ideal.)
Subsidizing tuition for those who cannot afford it means that suddenly they can afford a much higher tuition.Other pitfalls to avoid in government workforce programs are the unintended negative consequences. For one, subsidizing tuition for those who cannot afford it means that suddenly they can afford a much higher tuition. Affordability, therefore, improves much less than predicted (unless you’re an economist, in which case it’s exactly what you predicted). Why do education programs nationwide charge the maximum that students can bear after all government aid? Because they can. Decrease the subsidy and watch tuition go down.
For another, subsidizing the winning occupations means getting more people into those occupations. That means wage pressure abates in those professions and wages go down.
Thanks, West Virginia Legislature! Thanks, Congress!
Even if you won’t ride with me so far as to privatize public colleges, at least reconsider WIOA, state workforce boards, the local soviets, and well-intentioned government-funded workforce education programs that are likely to have unintended negative consequences.
Adam Kissel is a visiting lecturer at Trinity College and a board member of the National Association of Scholars.
Author
Adam Kissel
