[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 151 (Monday, November 1, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H11170-H11176]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE ACCESS ACT
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 974) to establish a
program to afford high school graduates from the District of Columbia
the benefits of in-State tuition at State colleges and universities
outside the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:
Senate amendment:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``District of Columbia College
Access Act of 1999''.
SEC. 2. PURPOSE.
It is the purpose of this Act to establish a program that
enables college-bound residents of the District of Columbia
to have greater choices among institutions of higher
education.
SEC. 3. PUBLIC SCHOOL PROGRAM.
(a) Grants.--
(1) In general.--From amounts appropriated under subsection
(i) the Mayor shall award grants to eligible institutions
that enroll eligible students to pay the difference between
the tuition and fees charged for in-State students and the
tuition and fees charged for out-of-State students on behalf
of each eligible student enrolled in the eligible
institution.
(2) Maximum student amounts.--An eligible student shall
have paid on the student's behalf under this section--
(A) not more than $10,000 for any 1 award year (as defined
in section 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1088)); and
(B) a total of not more than $50,000.
(3) Proration.--The Mayor shall prorate payments under this
section for students who attend an eligible institution on
less than a full-time basis.
(b) Reduction for Insufficient Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--If the funds appropriated pursuant to
subsection (i) for any fiscal year are insufficient to award
a grant in the amount determined under subsection (a) on
behalf of each eligible student enrolled in an eligible
institution, then the Mayor shall--
(A) first, ratably reduce the amount of the tuition and fee
payment made on behalf of each eligible student who has not
received funds under this section for a preceding year; and
(B) after making reductions under subparagraph (A), ratably
reduce the amount of the tuition and fee payments made on
behalf of all other eligible students.
(2) Adjustments.--The Mayor may adjust the amount of
tuition and fee payments made under paragraph (1) based on--
(A) the financial need of the eligible students to avoid
undue hardship to the eligible students; or
(B) undue administrative burdens on the Mayor.
(3) Further adjustments.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (1)
and (2), the Mayor may prioritize the making or amount of
tuition and fee payments under this subsection based on the
income and need of eligible students.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible institution.--The term ``eligible
institution'' means an institution that--
(A) is a public institution of higher education located--
(i) in the State of Maryland or the Commonwealth of
Virginia; or
(ii) outside the State of Maryland or the Commonwealth of
Virginia, but only if the Mayor--
(I) determines that a significant number of eligible
students are experiencing difficulty in gaining admission to
any public institution of higher education located in the
State of Maryland or the Commonwealth of Virginia because of
any preference afforded in-State residents by the
institution;
(II) consults with the Committee on Government Reform of
the House of Representatives, the Committee on Governmental
Affairs of the Senate, and the Secretary regarding expanding
the program under this section to include such institutions
located outside of the State of Maryland or the Commonwealth
of Virginia; and
(III) takes into consideration the projected cost of the
expansion and the potential effect of the expansion on the
amount of individual tuition and fee payments made under this
section in succeeding years;
(B) is eligible to participate in the student financial
assistance programs under title IV of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.); and
(C) enters into an agreement with the Mayor containing such
conditions as the Mayor may specify, including a requirement
that the institution use the funds made available under this
section to supplement and not supplant assistance that
otherwise would be provided to eligible students from the
District of Columbia.
(2) Eligible student.--The term ``eligible student'' means
an individual who--
(A) was domiciled in the District of Columbia for not less
than the 12 consecutive months preceding the commencement of
the freshman year at an institution of higher education;
(B) graduated from a secondary school or received the
recognized equivalent of a secondary school diploma on or
after January 1, 1998;
(C) begins the individual's undergraduate course of study
within the 3 calendar years (excluding any period of service
on active duty in the Armed Forces, or service under the
Peace Corps Act (22 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.) or subtitle D of
title I of the National and Community Service Act of 1990 (42
U.S.C. 12571 et seq.)) of graduation from a secondary school,
or obtaining the recognized equivalent of a secondary school
diploma;
(D) is enrolled or accepted for enrollment, on at least a
half-time basis, in a degree, certificate, or other program
(including a program of study abroad approved for credit by
the institution at which such student is enrolled) leading to
a recognized educational credential at an eligible
institution;
(E) if enrolled in an eligible institution, is maintaining
satisfactory progress in the course of study the student is
pursuing in accordance with section 484(c) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1091(c)); and
(F) has not completed the individual's first undergraduate
baccalaureate course of study.
(3) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the
term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1001).
(4) Mayor.--The term ``Mayor'' means the Mayor of the
District of Columbia.
(5) Secondary school.--The term ``secondary school'' has
the meaning given that term under section 14101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
8801).
(6) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Education.
(d) Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed
to require an institution of higher education to alter the
institution's admissions policies or standards in any manner
to enable an eligible student to enroll in the institution.
(e) Applications.--Each student desiring a tuition payment
under this section shall submit an application to the
eligible institution at such time, in such manner, and
accompanied by such information as the eligible institution
may require.
(f) Administration of Program.--
(1) In general.--The Mayor shall carry out the program
under this section in consultation with the Secretary. The
Mayor may enter into a grant, contract, or cooperative
agreement with another public or private entity to administer
the program under this section if the Mayor determines that
doing so is a more efficient way of carrying out the program.
(2) Policies and procedures.--The Mayor, in consultation
with institutions of higher education eligible for
participation in the program authorized under this section,
shall develop policies and procedures for the administration
of the program.
(3) Memorandum of agreement.--The Mayor and the Secretary
shall enter into a Memorandum of Agreement that describes--
[[Page H11171]]
(A) the manner in which the Mayor shall consult with the
Secretary with respect to administering the program under
this section; and
(B) any technical or other assistance to be provided to the
Mayor by the Secretary for purposes of administering the
program under this section (which may include access to the
information in the common financial reporting form developed
under section 483 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1090)).
(g) Mayor's Report.--The Mayor shall report to Congress
annually regarding--
(1) the number of eligible students attending each eligible
institution and the amount of the grant awards paid to those
institutions on behalf of the eligible students;
(2) the extent, if any, to which a ratable reduction was
made in the amount of tuition and fee payments made on behalf
of eligible students; and
(3) the progress in obtaining recognized academic
credentials of the cohort of eligible students for each year.
(h) GAO Report.--Beginning on the date of enactment of this
Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
monitor the effect of the program assisted under this section
on educational opportunities for eligible students. The
Comptroller General shall analyze whether eligible students
had difficulty gaining admission to eligible institutions
because of any preference afforded in-State residents by
eligible institutions, and shall expeditiously report any
findings regarding such difficulty to Congress and the Mayor.
In addition the Comptroller General shall--
(1) analyze the extent to which there are an insufficient
number of eligible institutions to which District of Columbia
students can gain admission, including admission aided by
assistance provided under this Act, due to--
(A) caps on the number of out-of-State students the
institution will enroll;
(B) significant barriers imposed by academic entrance
requirements (such as grade point average and standardized
scholastic admissions tests); and
(C) absence of admission programs benefiting minority
students;
(2) assess the impact of the program assisted under this
Act on enrollment at the University of the District of
Columbia; and
(3) report the findings of the analysis described in
paragraph (1) and the assessment described in paragraph (2)
to Congress and the Mayor.
(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the District of Columbia to carry out
this section $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and such sums
as may be necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal
years. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
(j) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect with
respect to payments for periods of instruction that begin on
or after January 1, 2000.
SEC. 4. ASSISTANCE TO THE UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA.
(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (c), the Secretary
may provide financial assistance to the University of the
District of Columbia for the fiscal year to enable the
university to carry out activities authorized under part B of
title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1060
et seq.).
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the District of Columbia to carry out
this section $1,500,000 for fiscal year 2000 and such sums as
may be necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.
(c) Special Rule.--For any fiscal year, the University of
the District of Columbia may receive financial assistance
pursuant to this section, or pursuant to part B of title III
of the Higher Education Act of 1965, but not pursuant to both
this section and such part B.
SEC. 5. PRIVATE SCHOOL PROGRAM.
(a) Grants.--
(1) In general.--From amounts appropriated under subsection
(f) the Mayor shall award grants to eligible institutions
that enroll eligible students to pay the cost of tuition and
fees at the eligible institutions on behalf of each eligible
student enrolled in an eligible institution. The Mayor may
prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out
this section.
(2) Maximum student amounts.--An eligible student shall
have paid on the student's behalf under this section--
(A) not more than $2,500 for any 1 award year (as defined
in section 481 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1088)); and
(B) a total of not more than $12,500.
(3) Proration.--The Mayor shall prorate payments under this
section for students who attend an eligible institution on
less than a full-time basis.
(b) Reduction for Insufficient Appropriations.--
(1) In general.--If the funds appropriated pursuant to
subsection (f) for any fiscal year are insufficient to award
a grant in the amount determined under subsection (a) on
behalf of each eligible student enrolled in an eligible
institution, then the Mayor shall--
(A) first, ratably reduce the amount of the tuition and fee
payment made on behalf of each eligible student who has not
received funds under this section for a preceding year; and
(B) after making reductions under subparagraph (A), ratably
reduce the amount of the tuition and fee payments made on
behalf of all other eligible students.
(2) Adjustments.--The Mayor may adjust the amount of
tuition and fee payments made under paragraph (1) based on--
(A) the financial need of the eligible students to avoid
undue hardship to the eligible students; or
(B) undue administrative burdens on the Mayor.
(3) Further adjustments.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (1)
and (2), the Mayor may prioritize the making or amount of
tuition and fee payments under this subsection based on the
income and need of eligible students.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible institution.--The term ``eligible
institution'' means an institution that--
(A)(i) is a private, nonprofit, associate or baccalaureate
degree-granting, institution of higher education, as defined
in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1001(a)), the main campus of which is located--
(I) in the District of Columbia;
(II) in the city of Alexandria, Falls Church, or Fairfax,
or the county of Arlington or Fairfax, in the Commonwealth of
Virginia, or a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of
Virginia located within any such county; or
(III) in the county of Montgomery or Prince George's in the
State of Maryland, or a political subdivision of the State of
Maryland located within any such county;
(ii) is eligible to participate in the student financial
assistance programs under title IV of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.); and
(iii) enters into an agreement with the Mayor containing
such conditions as the Mayor may specify, including a
requirement that the institution use the funds made available
under this section to supplement and not supplant assistance
that otherwise would be provided to eligible students from
the District of Columbia; or
(B) is a private historically Black college or university
(for purposes of this subparagraph such term shall have the
meaning given the term ``part B institution'' in section
322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1061(2)) the main campus of which is located in the State of
Maryland or the Commonwealth of Virginia.
(2) Eligible student.--The term ``eligible student'' means
an individual who meets the requirements of subparagraphs (A)
through (F) of section 3(c)(2).
(3) Mayor.--The term ``Mayor'' means the Mayor of the
District of Columbia.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Education.
(d) Application.--Each eligible student desiring a tuition
and fee payment under this section shall submit an
application to the eligible institution at such time, in such
manner, and accompanied by such information as the eligible
institution may require.
(e) Administration of Program.--
(1) In general.--The Mayor shall carry out the program
under this section in consultation with the Secretary. The
Mayor may enter into a grant, contract, or cooperative
agreement with another public or private entity to administer
the program under this section if the Mayor determines that
doing so is a more efficient way of carrying out the program.
(2) Policies and procedures.--The Mayor, in consultation
with institutions of higher education eligible for
participation in the program authorized under this section,
shall develop policies and procedures for the administration
of the program.
(3) Memorandum of agreement.--The Mayor and the Secretary
shall enter into a Memorandum of Agreement that describes--
(A) the manner in which the Mayor shall consult with the
Secretary with respect to administering the program under
this section; and
(B) any technical or other assistance to be provided to the
Mayor by the Secretary for purposes of administering the
program under this section.
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the District of Columbia to carry out
this section $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and such sums as
may be necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.
Such funds shall remain available until expended.
(g) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect with
respect to payments for periods of instruction that begin on
or after January 1, 2000.
SEC. 6. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Personnel.--The Secretary of Education shall arrange
for the assignment of an individual, pursuant to subchapter
VI of chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, to serve as
an adviser to the Mayor of the District of Columbia with
respect to the programs assisted under this Act.
(b) Administrative Expenses.--The Mayor of the District of
Columbia may use not more than 7 percent of the funds made
available for a program under section 3 or 5 for a fiscal
year to pay the administrative expenses of a program under
section 3 or 5 for the fiscal year.
(c) Inspector General Review.--Each of the programs
assisted under this Act shall be subject to audit and other
review by the Inspector General of the Department of
Education in the same manner as programs are audited and
reviewed under the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C.
App.).
(d) Gifts.--The Mayor of the District of Columbia may
accept, use, and dispose of donations of services or property
for purposes of carrying out this Act.
(e) Funding Rule.--Notwithstanding sections 3 and 5, the
Mayor may use funds made available--
(1) under section 3 to award grants under section 5 if the
amount of funds made available under section 3 exceeds the
amount of funds awarded under section 3 during a time period
determined by the Mayor; and
(2) under section 5 to award grants under section 3 if the
amount of funds made available under section 5 exceeds the
amount of funds awarded under section 5 during a time period
determined by the Mayor.
(f) Maximum Student Amount Adjustments.--The Mayor shall
establish rules to adjust the maximum student amounts
described in sections 3(a)(2)(B) and 5(a)(2)(B) for eligible
[[Page H11172]]
students described in section 3(c)(2) or 5(c)(2) who transfer
between the eligible institutions described in section
3(c)(1) or 5(c)(1).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Davis) and the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia
(Ms. Norton) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. DAVIS of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, we have traveled a long way with
the D.C. College Access Act. From March 4 when we introduced it, to
markup in our subcommittee, unanimous approval in the Committee on
Government Reform chaired by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton);
to House passage on May 24, and then on to October 19, passage in the
Senate with friendly amendments which we are pleased to accept today. I
am deeply proud of our hard work.
My thanks to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms.
Norton), the ranking member of the subcommittee on the District of
Columbia and all of the original cosponsors: The gentlewoman from
Maryland (Mrs. Morella), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn), the gentleman from California (Mr.
Horn), the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Ehrlich) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Moran). My thanks to Speaker Hastert, Chairman Dan Burton and Majority
Leader Dick Armey for their support and for permitting expeditious
consideration of this. And my thanks to the Clinton administration and
the Department of Education for working with us in a bipartisan spirit
of cooperation to work out our differences and move this thing through
for consideration.
My thanks to the D.C. Appropriations Chair Ernest Istook and his
Senate counterpart, Kay Bailey Hutchison, for including the money in
the budget recommended by the administration. And my thanks to my own
counterpart in the Senate, George Voinovich, for his patience and
persistence in having such an excellent hearing and markup and for
shepherding the amendments. And to Senator Fred Thompson, chairman of
the Senate committee, for his support. My thanks as well to Senator
Jeffords, Senator Durbin and Senator Warner for helping us to continue
to keep this legislation on track and work to improve it.
And my thanks to some of the staff people who worked on this landmark
law: My own staff director and counsel, Howie Denis; my chief of staff,
Peter Sirh; and Jon Bouker of the gentlewoman from the District of
Columbia's staff.
I am grateful to those leading regional foundations and companies
that have come together in an extraordinary and historic effort to
assist District of Columbia students. The legislation we are passing
today is essential to those great endeavors in the private sector.
In 1995, the District of Columbia faced a crisis of epic proportions.
Congress, in passing the control board legislation, with its creation
of the position of chief financial officer, and then in 1997 with the
passage of the D.C. Revitalization Act and its related reforms,
embarked on a critically important process to address the crisis in a
truly bipartisan way. The legislation before us today would not be
possible but for the progress the city has achieved with the initiative
of Congress and the executive branch working together, and, I might
add, with the leadership of Tony Williams and the city council.
The city's return to the private financial markets is solid evidence
that what Congress did produced credible numbers and better
performance. Key elements of our reforms include Federal assumption of
certain functions performed by State governments, and incentives for
economic development and private sector jobs. The economic recovery of
the Nation's capital benefits the entire region and country by
realizing the vision which has so often been expressed. The new MCI
Center and the Convention Center project, a tax credit for first-time
homebuyers, enhanced public safety and water quality are just some of
the improvements we have seen.
Two months ago, Speaker Hastert and I attended a moving ceremony at
the Edison Friendship public charter school in the District. Majority
Leader Armey, Education Chairman Bill Goodling, Senator Kay Bailey
Hutchison and Paul Coverdell were with us. The Edison school and many
other charter schools represent another great success story in the
District that Congress has helped us achieve.
We know that many concerns remain. Many of them are addressed in the
budget and others will be dealt with later.
The bill before us today will enable District residents to attend
public colleges and universities in Virginia and Maryland at in-State
tuition rates. We have included tuition assistance grants as another
option for private colleges in and adjacent to the District in those
counties, including historically black colleges and universities in
Virginia and Maryland. The CBO estimate fits within the money this bill
authorizes and which the appropriators have included in their bill.
Mayor Williams has said that this bill is very, very important not
only in improving education but in bringing the city back. I believe it
is the best money we can spend and is a shining example of what a
bipartisan urban agenda can achieve. H.R. 974 will level the playing
field for District high school graduates. It will give them the key to
higher education in this region.
Back on March 4 when I introduced the bill, we went to Eastern High
School with the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia. It is not
far from the Capitol. We announced the proposal to students and
faculty. The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia and Mayor
Williams were with me at the time. I was deeply moved by the reaction
of the students. I will never forget how many took our hands and looked
into our eyes and thanked us for introducing this measure. This gives
them hope for the future, hope for an affordable college education,
something that is enjoyed by students in 50 States in the United States
but is not a reality in our Nation's capital.
Fighting for educational opportunity is one of the reasons I entered
public life. I am proud of so much that we have been able to do in the
Nation's capital for the almost 5 years that I have had the privilege
of serving as chairman of the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia.
Economic development, public safety, the real estate market and so many
other aspects of city life have changed for the better and the city is
working to improve itself. This is something that I think ultimately
had to happen and is happening. But nothing has given me more
satisfaction than working to improve educational opportunities for the
city's youth. We need a healthy city to have a healthy Washington
region.
This bill, expanding higher educational choices, is an enormous leap
forward. It is our vision for the future.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 974, the D.C. College Access Act,
facing its final House consideration today, is a splendid and near
typical example of the bipartisan way in which the gentleman from
Virginia and I have worked together since he became chair of the
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia 4 years ago. I want to thank
the gentleman from Virginia for his unflagging and indispensable
leadership and for the energetic work of his staff, especially Peter
Sirh and Howie Denis, who worked hand in hand with my own able
legislative director, Jon Bouker, every step of the way until we have
gotten to final passage today.
H.R. 974 marks a turning point in our approach to lifting the
Nation's capital from fiscal crisis and in affording its citizens a way
to overcome the handicap of being without a State to assist it in
offering higher education. Because of the importance of higher
education today and its links to full and equal citizenship, the D.C.
College Access Act is a bill of historic proportions and
[[Page H11173]]
ranks as one of the most important pieces of legislation for District
of Columbia residents in our history. I am especially pleased that
final passage of H.R. 974 today will allow Mayor Tony Williams and the
city, working together with the Department of Education, to have the
program up and running next fall.
{time} 1600
Both the House and Senate and the administration have worked closely
and collegially on H.R. 974. All deserve credit and praise today. I
want to thank Senator George Voinovich, Government Affairs Subcommittee
Chair; Senate ranking member, Richard Durbin; and Senator Jim Jeffords
for their vital work in helping to craft an acceptable compromise
between the Senate and House versions of the bill and for securing
unanimous passage in the Senate on October 20,1999.
I also thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), who has
consistently supported and pressed forward bills benefiting the
District; the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr.
Waxman), whose valuable assistance has been unfailing; and
appropriation chairs, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) and Kay
Bailey Hutchinson for their critical support in assuring necessary
funding for the program; and, of course, Secretary of Education Dick
Riley for indispensable work on this bill in both houses.
I want particularly to recognize the President who included funds for
this bill in his fiscal year 2000 budget, not only opening the way for
the bill to pass today, but also assuring that there would be
sufficient funds to do the job.
H.R. 974 offers District residents State public higher education
alternatives similar to those available to other Americans as a matter
of right. The central feature of H.R. 974 is an authorization for the
Federal Government to pay the difference between the cost of in-state
and out-of-state tuition fees for D.C. residents permitting students,
once admitted, to attend public colleges and universities outside of
the District and at in-state rates.
The mayor will administer the in-state tuition program in
consultation with the Department of Education. In addition to full in-
state tuition, the bill authorizes $2,500 per student for D.C.
residents to attend private colleges and universities in the District
and in certain counties surrounding the District.
The bill also contains an authorization granting the District's own
State university, the University of the District of Columbia funded
historical black college and university status in recognition of the
fact that many D.C. students prefer to attend their own State
university or for a variety of reasons cannot attend college outside of
the District. UDC has already received HBCU funds beginning in fiscal
year 1999.
Young people graduating from D.C. high schools now will be treated as
are students in the 50 States. To qualify, a student must live in the
District for 12 months before beginning college, must have graduated
from high school after January 1, 1998, must begin college within 3
years of graduation, must be pursuing her first undergraduate degree
and must be enrolled at least half time. The college must also sign a
formal agreement with the mayor's office.
The bill we consider today contains three important protections
negotiated with the Senate. First, the mayor will have the latitude to
expend the in-state tuition program to the 50 States subject to cost
instead of a blanket confinement to scarce slots in Maryland and
Virginia. Second, students who will be freshmen, sophomores, and
juniors when the program begins next year will qualify for in-state
tuition rates. I appreciate that Senators Voinovich and Durbin worked
with us on this provision inasmuch as the Senate version of the bill
originally applied only to freshmen.
District residents are particularly enthusiastic about the expansion
of this particular provision because typically many go to college with
just enough money for 1 year, yielding a high college dropout rate
because of inability to meet college expenses. Third, institutions in
counties close to the District including HBCUs in Maryland and Virginia
where many D.C. residents often attend will be eligible.
It is important to note that our work on H.R. 974 is bolstered by an
extraordinary private sector effort which is raising an even larger
amount to help District students prepare to attend college and to
supplement the costs beyond the tuition costs offered in this bill.
Business leaders led by Don Graham, publisher of the Washington Post,
and Lucio Noto, CEO of Mobil Oil, have already gotten commitments of
$17 million and plan to raise $20 million in private funds to
supplement the funds authorized by H.R. 974. This bill is a true
public-private effort with the private sector more than equaling what
we do here today.
The final passage of H.R. 974 today is a milestone in the effort to
provide equal rights and citizenship for D.C. residents. This bill
fills a unique and large educational gap that has had a particularly
harmful effect on families here. Inequality in higher education
opportunity hampers the continuing revitalization of the Nation's
capital because, without the array of State offerings for higher
education, residents have an incentive to move out of the District to
neighboring jurisdictions.
As college costs have escalated, higher education opportunities have
significantly affected, indeed caused, flight from the District.
Consequently, the city has been left with many residents unable to meet
their needs or talents to access to appropriate institutions from
junior and specialized colleges to 4- year institutions. Thus, many
have been left without the education necessary to contribute to the
city's tax base. With the passage of H.R. 974, District residents will
no longer be the only Americans among the States without access to the
necessary choices for higher education today.
I want to express my personal thanks once again to the leaders of my
committee and subcommittee and appropriation committees, as well as
their counterparts in the Senate and the administration. I want to also
express the gratitude of the parents and the children of the District
who have let me and my office know in no uncertain terms that they
enthusiastically and overwhelmingly support H.R. 974 and that they look
forward to the historic opportunities provided by the District of
Columbia College Access Act.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), the vice chairman of the
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia and original sponsor of this
legislation, who helped shepherd it through the subcommittee.
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 974, the
District of Columbia College Access Act, as amended by the Senate. I
want to add my congratulations to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Davis) for the inception of the bill and carrying it through with his
leadership inch by inch. I want to also commend the gentlewoman from
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for her leadership in that; and
as a matter of fact as has been mentioned and should be reiterated,
this is an excellent example of bipartisan cooperation for the benefit
of the United States on both sides of the aisle in both Houses with
several committees on both sides who have shepherded this bill through.
And I do want to add my thanks also to the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Burton), the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform and
Oversight and the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking
member. But the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) has been there from
the beginning, and his wonderful staff and the minority staff have been
there and the cosponsors; and I see the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Moran), who is also a cosponsor of this bill.
This higher education bill provides an opportunity for District of
Columbia residents who are high school graduates to attend colleges in
Maryland and Virginia at in-state tuition rates. I am pleased to be an
original cosponsor of the D.C. College Access Act. I believe that it
offers an extraordinary value. It will ensure that the most
economically disadvantaged students in our Nation's Capital are going
to have access to a variety of colleges, and it is going to go a long
way toward ensuring that the Metropolitan Washington area has a well-
educated workforce.
Access to college is one of the greatest achievements of our American
education system. Escalating costs of our
[[Page H11174]]
Nation's colleges and universities have created anxiety about college
affordability. As a matter of fact, I know firsthand about that disease
called ``mal tuition,'' paying those bills. In terms of anxiety, paying
for college ranks with how to pay for health care or housing or how to
cover the expenses of taking care of an elderly relative.
From issues that affect women to children at risk, I have always
tried to raise my voice in support of equality of opportunity. Well,
the D.C. College Access Act will provide equal opportunities for
students in the District. There is little doubt that high school
graduates who live in the District have far fewer college choices than
students in other parts of the country. Residents in all 50 American
States have a network of State-supported colleges to attend, and this
College Access Act will level the playing field for residents in the
District of Columbia.
I have received many letters of support from my constituents in
Montgomery County, Maryland, for H.R. 974. Montgomery College, a
community college, is particularly interested in playing a major role
in serving District residents. The college already enrolls nearly 150
District of Columbia residents, and even at their most costly out-of-
state tuition rate with plans to expand the Tacoma Park, Maryland
campus, the college expects to better accommodate more students from
the District.
So again I want to reiterate my strong support for the bill and the
Senate amendments to H.R. 974. With the swift passage of this bill, we
are continuing a strong and necessary investment in education which
will help America stay on top and help us to maintain our economic
vitality into the 21st century.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Moran), who is not only a cosponsor of the bill but is
the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia
whose leadership was important in assuring funding for this bill.
Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the
District of Columbia, who so ably represents the people of the District
of Columbia.
Mr. Speaker, the students of the District of Columbia are at a unique
educational disadvantage today. They are the only students in the
entire continental United States who do not have access to the State
college and university system that every other American family is able
to avail themselves of. I am not endorsing the concept of statehood,
which would be perhaps one way to achieve that objective, although we
would still then have to find the resources that would be necessary to
build a comparable college system; but I am endorsing the notion that
we should do everything we can to establish a level playing field for
those students who grow up in the District of Columbia, and this
legislation will accomplish that objective.
There are some extraordinarily gifted young men and women in the
District of Columbia, but we will never fully realize their potential
until they have access to the excellence that our college and
university systems are able to provide; and by expanding their access
to the colleges and universities in Virginia and Maryland particularly,
they will have that kind of opportunity which is bound to benefit all
of us, our economy, our society.
As the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) so well
knows, those students, those young men and women are, in fact, going to
enrich the campuses and the classrooms of the colleges and universities
in Virginia, as the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) realizes
that the same will happen in Maryland. We are doing ourselves a service
with this legislation, and that is why the D.C. appropriation act
includes $17 million to fund this authorization.
{time} 1615
This is a good idea. It will be one of the legacies that the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) will be able to point to with
pride, as I am sure his able assistants, Peter and Howard will as well,
and John on the staff of the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia
(Ms. Norton). It takes a lot of work, it takes a lot of commitment to
get legislation through as quickly as this was, but this provides a
true incentive so that we will see the real talent and potential of the
young men and women of the District of Columbia fully realized. It is
good legislation, and we should pass it unanimously.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me first thank my colleague from Virginia for his
eloquent remarks and also his help in the appropriations process and
from all aspects as we worked to improve the district. The gentleman
has been a true colleague in the essential part, as that term implies,
in terms of working together to make these kinds of things happen for
the region, because we recognize this is not just a city issue, it is a
justice issue, but it is also a regional issue of great import, and I
thank him.
Let me go briefly and talk about some of the changes in this bill
from the Senate that were changes from the House version that passed
earlier. These Senate amendments enable D.C. residents who are high
school graduates the opportunity to pay in-state tuition rates upon
admission to state colleges in Virginia and Maryland only. They would
have to be admitted as out of state students, so they are competing in
a larger pool, although the States themselves of Virginia and Maryland
have the opportunity to create select pools for District residents
should they choose to do that. But they will not be taking from in-
state students in Virginia and taking in-state places.
The difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition would be
paid from new Federal money being authorized and appropriated, up to
$10,000 per individual in any award year.
This also provides tuition assistance grants of $2,500 for D.C.
resident high school graduates who will be attending private colleges
in D.C. and adjacent counties in Virginia and Maryland and funding of
$5 million is authorized for this in FY 2000. It also includes private
historically black colleges in Virginia and Maryland. This was an
amendment that my colleague Senator Warner put on in the other body.
I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia
(Ms. Norton) on working also for the University of the District of
Columbia, that they are not lost in this. In fact, they are a
beneficiary of this legislation as well. She has given them HCBU status
and additional funding for the University of the District of Columbia
so they can hone and I think make greater their role for education than
they do today in the District. That should not be lost sight of as
well.
What UDC does not have and cannot be by itself, as no university can
be by itself, is a state university system. It will be one component of
the educational equation for D.C. residents, but it will now have
assistance from other areas as well, and, with this additional money, I
think its role will be strengthened in offering educational
opportunities to students from the District of Columbia.
There is no means test in this legislation, but if an authorized,
appropriated amount is insufficient, there is a ratable reduction, and
if a ratable reduction is necessary, the mayor, the local leaders
there, will have the ability to prioritize based on income and need of
eligible students. So we will be having the city make that, and it will
not be Congressionally mandated, should we have more people use this
legislation than are currently foreseen as doing so.
Actually, I think that would be a good thing. We hope this is
utilized, because I think the more people who are able to use this and
go to college, the better off we all are. Residents in the 50 states
already have a network of state supported colleges to attend. This bill
levels the playing field for students in the District of Columbia. High
school graduates would have to be a D.C. resident for at least one year
prior to eligibility, and they would have to begin undergraduate
courses within 3 years of high school graduation, excluding active
military service. This applies to those receiving recognized equivalent
of secondary school diplomas. It provides for an incentive for
population stability in the Nation's capital. It gives graduates more
choices. It does not affect admissions policies or standards. Regional
companies and foundations are helping students qualify for college
admission,
[[Page H11175]]
and this legislation compliments that effort.
My friend from the District of Columbia mentioned Lou Nodo at Mobil
Corporation, Don Graham at the Washington Post. Steve Case at America
OnLine has been another leader, and many other companies in the region
I think have contributed private dollars that will compliment this
effort.
We have had extraordinary bipartisan Congressional and administration
cooperation, as my colleague from Maryland noted. This will commence
applying to students who graduated in January and June of 1998. The
city will run the program with Federal oversight. Disbursements will be
made directly to the eligible colleges, and UDC, as I noted before,
will receive $1.5 million additional per year if it does not receive
funds as a historically black college under the Higher Education Act
from this legislation.
Once again though, the basic concept is to give children in the
District of Columbia the same educational opportunities for an
affordable college education that all of our children enjoy in the 50
states, an affordable college education. This will help narrow the gap
between the very rich and the very poor in an information age, and
education is the key to narrowing that gap.
In Fairfax County, across the river from the District, over 90
percent of those who will be graduating from high school this year or
are eligible to graduate from high school, will go on to higher
education. In the District of Columbia, those 18-year-olds, if they
graduate on time, it will be less than 25 percent, a huge disparity.
One of the reasons for this is for many of these kids there is no hope
or opportunity of an affordable college education. This legislation
takes an important step in giving them hope for the future.
I will just note in Fairfax County today our unemployment rate is
under 2 percent, it is about 1.8 percent. It is about 3\1/2\ times that
in the District of Columbia. Over the last 10 years, our economy
regionally has grown. Our Nation has prospered. My Congressional
district has prospered. But in the bottom quarter of economic strata
there has been very little movement, and in places in the District
there has been little movement. The way to equalize this is through
educational opportunities, and it is not by the government coming in
with greater subsidies. That is a last resort. Giving people equal
opportunity is the best resort. That is what this legislation does.
It guarantees a quality of opportunity by allowing college and
technology educations to be affordable for everyone. When the
educational opportunities are equal, when college is affordable for
D.C. residents, as well as Maryland and Virginia residents, we are
going to see more District of Columbia students attending college,
being trained for the jobs of the future, so they can start businesses,
earn good salaries, support their children, return a tax base to the
District of Columbia, and make our Nation's Capital the city it
deserves to be and has the potential to become.
This legislation is a giant step forward. It is not the whole
equation, but it is a vital part of the equation, Mr. Speaker. I urge
my colleagues to pass this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to once again thank my good partner in the
District in this House, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), for
the way he has worked steadfastly on this bill. When we met small
problems along the way, and they were almost always small, we simply
gathered our forces and with his staff and mine and he and me, we kept
charging forward.
The way in which we worked on this bill should be noted as well,
because when we got to the Senate and found that there were
differences, instead of squaring off, we simply closed in and Senate
and House worked together until we got a bill that both of us could in
fact support.
Mr. Speaker, I want to place this bill in its historic context. I
believe it fair to say that this bill belongs in the category of bills
that have made an historic difference to the District of Columbia,
bills like the Home Rule Act, the Revitalization Act, and my tax
benefits such as the $5,000 home buyer credit.
This bill brings the kind of benefits to the District that will have
the same kind of broad effect on individuals, as well as the city
itself. It keeps the city's demographics intact, and yet it aids
individuals. It is a win-win in all of the ways that matter.
This bill, as the chairman has indicated, did not overlook the
residents of the District of Columbia who cannot leave this town. Many
of them have family obligations, many of them do not want to leave the
District, so UDC receives historically black college and university
funded status, something the university has sought for decades, and
receives in this bill only because this bill opened opportunities in
other ways and the chairman was willing to work with me to make sure
that in this particular way we filled this gap for students who remain
in the District.
It is a win-win for youngsters who have friends in other states
across the United States and see them having a choice of institutions,
from junior college, to all kinds of specialized schools, to 4-year
colleges, and see themselves with a struggling state university, one
that many of them love, but simply does not provide them the array of
choices that youngsters in the 50 states have.
It is a win-win for the region because all of us understand that our
region has no borders and that when we work together and open
opportunities for District residents, the entire region benefits.
It is a win-win for private business, which has stepped in with its
own version of the D.C. College Access Act, a private version which
inspired in many ways the public version which we pass today.
Mr. Speaker, everywhere I go in the city I meet the same response to
this bill. I go in the poorest sections of the city all the time, and I
go into the sections of our city where people have many opportunities,
and the only way you would know the difference is by the color of their
skin, because you certainly will not know it by the way in which they
have received this bill.
This bill is of the very first priority to District residents, the
District residents who would have no other opportunity to go to
institutions of the kind that will be available to them except through
this bill, and residents who have other opportunities, but would as
soon move out of the District than be left to pay the difference, to
pay the fine, as it were, of remaining a District resident once their
children get ready for college.
Like my tax bills, this bill draws a big circle around the city and
all gathered to join it. This bill is not one that we might have
thought would pass even a couple of years ago, but with the city
returning to full health, it is just the kind of response from the
Congress that will encourage the city to do what it needs to do,
because the sine qua non of this bill is that there is no free ride and
no free lunch. You cannot get access to this bill unless you graduate
from high school. What this bill will do will be to encourage
youngsters who did not see any reason to go through all the work to
graduate from high school because there was nothing there afterwards
for them. Now there is the same thing that there would be if they lived
in any of the 50 states.
I speak, I know, for the residents of the District of Columbia and
every ward of the city when I express my gratitude to the chairman and
to all who have worked on this bill and to the Congress of the United
States for what I hope will be final passage unanimously today.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and urge unanimous
passage of H.R. 974.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say to my colleague, I have enjoyed working
with her on this legislation. I think it is landmark. I appreciate the
support of the other Members, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs.
Morella), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and the other
sponsors, many from the region, some outside it, and the support of the
administration. Without all of us working together, putting aside some
of the jurisdictional issues, we would not be where we are today.
[[Page H11176]]
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker I rise today in support of the District of
Columbia College Access Act.
This legislation would allow high school graduates from the District
of Columbia to pay in-State tuition rates at public colleges and
universities in Maryland and Virginia. Specifically, the bill would
allow District students to apply for up to $10,000 a year, subject to a
$50,000 cap, to offset the difference between in-State and out-of-State
tuition rates. Furthermore, students who choose to attend private
schools in the District and the adjacent Maryland and Virginia counties
may also apply for up to $2,500 to offset the cost of their private
tuition.
Although the District of Columbia Appropriations Act has not been
signed into law, I am pleased the latest version contains $17 million
for this important initiative.
As many of you know, I graduated high school just across the border
in Prince Georges County in 1957. My parents were from very modest
means and quite frankly were not in the financial position to help me
pay for college. I consider myself lucky though. Lucky because when my
stepfather, who was in the Air Force, was transferred up to Andrews Air
Force Base our family settled in Maryland.
Going part time I was able to go to the University of Maryland. I
used to go to school during the day and at night I worked first as a
file clerk at the Central Intelligence Agency and then on Capitol Hill.
It was not always easy balancing school and work and it took me 6 years
to earn my undergraduate degree. However, I was able to do it because I
had in-state tuition and I consider my decision to attend the
University of Maryland as one of the best decisions I have made in my
life.
The legislation that we have before us affords high school graduates
in the District of Columbia the same opportunity that I had. The
opportunity to attend an excellent university at a reasonable cost.
I would like to thank Congressman Davis and Congresswoman Norton for
all their work on this legislation which I am pleased to cosponsor.
Additionally, I would like to thank D.C. Appropriations Subcommittee
Chairman Istook and Ranking Member Moran for including funding for this
legislation in their bill.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House Appropriations
Subcommittee on the District of Columbia, and as a cosponsor of this
legislation, I rise to encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 974, the
District of Columbia College Access Act.
The Washington metropolitan area is one of America's leading centers
for high technology. Telecommunications giant MCI was founded here. In
the suburbs lies America Online, the MAE East, and several powerful and
growing engines of the global internet economy. Yet, that growth, and
these opportunities, lie beyond the reach of young people in the
Nation's Capital City, who lack affordable access to many of this
region's institutions of higher learning.
We can change this situation for the better, for the betterment of
our country, and for the betterment of the young people of this great
city.
I want the young people of the District of Columbia to have a
fighting chance to achieve the American dream. I want for the global
internet economy to be their economy too, and to be of their making.
The D.C. College Access Act simply provides the young people of the
District of Columbia an opportunity to have access to discounted ``in-
state' tuition rates to public and private educational institutions in
the state of Maryland, the commonwealth of Virginia, and here in the
District of Columbia.
The D.C. appropriations bill recently adopted by the House provides
$17 million toward this program. I hope that the President will support
that appropriation.
I commend my colleague, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) for
developing this important legislation. And I also hope that my
colleagues will support this bill.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Barton of Texas). The question is on the
motion offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) that the
House suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill,
H.R. 974.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate amendment was
concurred in.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________