[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 142 (Wednesday, September 13, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H8891-H8892]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                     ON ACHIEVING A BALANCED BUDGET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with some sense of sadness, 
and probably quite a bit of outrage. The administration, in its zeal to 
protect the President's direct student loan program and hide their 
failure to really do anything about balancing the budget, has been 
using scare tactics to frighten and mislead the American people in 
order to, I suppose, to strap them from the need to balance the budget.

                              {time}  2100

  To do this, the administration has pulled out all stops. It has used 
Presidential public relation mechanisms at the taxpayers' expense to 
spread misinformation about our plans to balance the budget in 7 years.
  Even the President has gone on the road with many of these 
misinterpretations of what it is we plan to do to balance the budget. 
So in an effort to set the record straight, I have sent a letter to the 
President asking that he publicly apologize to the America people for 
his scare tactics, and urging that he use all the methods at his 
disposal to set the records straight and level with the America people 
about what we are and are not going to do.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to set the record straight at this time. 
Republicans are preserving, I repeat, preserving the in-school interest 
subsidy for undergraduate and graduate students, even though its 
elimination was recommended by the President's Budget Director, Alice 
Rivlin, in her suggestions as to how to balance the budget. We plan to 
only touch the interest subsidy for the 6 month grace period following 
graduation, and during that time no payments are made. The grace period 
will remain intact. The borrower will repay the interest accrued during 
that 6 month period, which will add about $4 a month to an average 
monthly student loan.
  Republicans, on the other hand, are asking the private lenders to 
carry much of the burden for reforms in the loan program in order to 
achieve a balanced budget in 7 years. In fact, reforms to the student 
loan industry will save the taxpayers nearly $5 billion. We will 
eliminate the President's direct student loan program in order to save 
the American taxpayers more than $1.5 billion over 7 years, according 
to the Congressional Budget Office, which was the group that the 
President in his speech here on the floor told us we should be paying 
attention to.
  We will not increase, I repeat, not increase, the origination loan 
fee paid by students, nor will we increase the interest rates on loans 
for students. We do not take away the interest rate reductions students 
are to receive for new loans effective July, 1988. We keep the 
President's budget proposal on Perkins loans, a revolving fund that 
perpetuates itself, adding no new funds, and therefore encouraging 
lower default rates by tougher collection efforts. Pell grant awards 
will be the largest in history in 1996 under our plan. The Supplemental 
Education Opportunity Grant Program, the work study program, will be 
funded at last year's level; no cuts.
  We all know that the direct lending is a sacred cow to the 
administration. However, we cannot cling to a gold-plated direct 
student loan program and put welfare for the benefit of bureaucrats 
ahead of the needs of students.
  One of the most outrageous statements I heard was that if we do not 
go the direct lending route, the Government will have to pick up 100 
percent of the risk. Who in the world picks up 100 percent of the risk 
when you do direct lending? We not only pick up 100 percent of the 
risk, but we also have to borrow the money up front. We do not 
guarantee the loan, we borrow the money up front. We pay interest on 
the money we borrow so we increase what it is the American taxpayer has 
to do to carry that load.
  We keep the President's budget proposal, as I said, on Perkins loans. 
now, what is the administration so afraid of that it would resort to 
these scare tactics? Well, again, I want to review
 one more time what we do, so that the students out there and the 
parents are not misled.

  If the Congress fails to act now, by the year 2002 the national debt 
will exceed $6.5 trillion. That is a fact.
  Another fact: Unless growth rates and mandatory spending are slowed, 
all Federal revenues will be consumed by a handful of programs.
  Fact: Under the Republican budget resolution, the Federal budget will 
be running a surplus of $6.4 billion in the year 2002.
  Fact: According to the President's 1995 budget, unless we gain 
control of spending, the lifetime tax rate for children born after 1993 
will exceed 82 percent. The most important thing we can do for the 
children of today is to balance the budget. If we do that, we can 
reduce interest rates by 2 percent. That affects everyone. That affects 
those who have student loans; that affects those who have a mortgage; 
that affects those who are buying an automobile on time.
  Fact: While balancing the budget, the maximum Pell grant award will 
increase from $2,340 in 1995 to $2,444 in 1996. Even while balancing 
the budget, annual student loan volume will increase from $24.5 billion 
in 1995 to $36 billion in the year 2002, a 47-percent increase.
  Fact: Even while balancing the budget, the average student loan 
amount increases from $3,646 in 1995 to $4,300 in the year 2000.
  Fact: In order to balance the budget, Congress does not eliminate the 
in-school interest subsidy for college students.

[[Page H 8892]]

  Fact: In order to balance the budget, Congress does not increase loan 
origination fees.
  Fact: In order to balance the budget, Congress does not cut college 
work study.
  Fact: In order to balance the budget, Congress does not cut 
supplemental education opportunity grants.
  Fact: In order to balance the budget, Congress does not cut the TRIO 
program.
  Fact: The President continues to claim that the direct student loan 
program saves the taxpayers $5.2 billion, while lowering interest rates 
and fees to students. But the Congressional Budget Office, who the 
President said we should listen to, says that the direct student loan 
program costs taxpayers over $1.5 billion, adding to the Niagara-size 
leak in Federal spending.
  Mr. Speaker, I did not pick this fight on direct lending. I was here 
to cooperate, as we generally do on education issues. No one from the 
White House has ever contacted me in relationship to direct lending. 
What we said in direct lending was we would do a pilot program, and we 
would do a pilot program to see at the end of perhaps 7 years what is 
the best approach to the student loan program.
  All of a sudden, the budget comes up from the White House, 2-year 
budget, direct lending, 100 percent in 2 years. We will not find out 
for 7 years whether anybody had the ability to collect. Oh, it is easy. 
Certainly certain universities and colleges love this business. All 
they have to do is give out the money. Who collects it? The Department 
of Education? I would be surprised if that would be successful.
  But we are willing to do the pilot program. We did not change the 
rules. We did not change the direction we were going.
  Fact: The Federal deficit results in up to a 2-percent higher 
interest rate for all Americans, including students.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to get the facts straight so that the American 
people will not be frightened by scare tactics.


                          ____________________