[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 122 (Tuesday, September 27, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H8362-H8365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATURAL DISASTER STUDENT AID FAIRNESS ACT
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3863) to provide the Secretary of Education with waiver
authority for the reallocation rules in the Campus-Based Aid programs,
and to extend the deadline by which funds have to be reallocated to
institutions of higher education due to a natural disaster, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3863
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Natural
Disaster Student Aid Fairness Act''.
(b) References.--References in this Act to ``the Act'' are
references to the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1001 et seq.).
SEC. 2. ALLOCATION AND USE OF CAMPUS-BASED HIGHER EDUCATION
ASSISTANCE.
(a) Waiver of Matching Requirements.--Notwithstanding
sections 413C(a)(2), 443(b)(5), and 463(a)(2) of the Act (20
U.S.C. 1070b-2(a)(2); 42 U.S.C. 2753(b)(5); 20 U.S.C.
1087cc(a)(2)), with respect to funds made available for
academic years 2004-2005 and 2005-2006--
(1) in the case of an institution of higher education
located in an area affected by a Gulf hurricane disaster, the
Secretary shall waive the requirement that a participating
institution of higher education provide a non-Federal share
or a capital contribution, as the case may be, to match
Federal funds provided to the institution for the programs
authorized pursuant to subpart 3 of part A, part C, and part
E of title IV of the Act; and
(2) in the case of an institution of higher education that
has accepted for enrollment any affected students, the
Secretary may waive that matching requirement after
considering the institution's student population and existing
resources, using consistent and objective criteria.
(b) Waiver of Reallocation Rules.--
(1) Authority to reallocate.--Notwithstanding sections
413D(d), 442(d), and 462(i) of the Act (20 U.S.C. 1070b-3(d);
42 U.S.C. 2752(d); 20 U.S.C. 1087bb(i)), the Secretary
shall--
(A) reallocate any funds returned under any of those
sections that were allocated to institutions of higher
education for award year 2004-2005 to an institution of
higher education that is eligible under paragraph (2) of this
subsection; and
(B) waive the allocation reduction for award year 2006-2007
for an institution returning more than 10 percent of its
allocation under any of those sections.
(2) Eligible institutions for reallocation.--An institution
of higher education may receive a reallocation of excess
allocations under this subsection if the institution--
(A) participates in the program for which excess
allocations are being reallocated; and
(B)(i) is located in an area affected by a Gulf hurricane
disaster; or
(ii) has accepted for enrollment any affected students in
academic year 2005-2006.
(3) Basis of reallocation.--The Secretary shall determine
the manner in which excess allocations shall be reallocated
to institutions under paragraph (1), and shall give
additional consideration to the needs of institutions located
in an area affected by a Gulf hurricane disaster.
(4) Additional waiver authority.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, in order to carry out this subsection, the
Secretary may waive or modify any statutory or regulatory
provision relating to the reallocation of excess allocations
under subpart 3 of part A, part C, or part E of title IV of
the Act in order to ensure that assistance is received by
affected institutions for affected students.
(c) Availability of Funds Date Extension.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of law--
(1) any funds available to the Secretary under sections
413A, 441, and 461 of the Act (20 U.S.C. 1070b; 42 U.S.C.
2751; 20 U.S.C. 1087aa) for which the period of availability
would otherwise expire on September 30, 2005, shall be
available for obligation by the Secretary until September 30,
2006 for the purposes of the programs authorized pursuant to
subpart 3 of part A, part C, and part E of title IV of the
Act, respectively; and
(2) the Secretary may recall any funds allocated to an
institution of higher education for award year 2004-2005
under section 413D, 442, or 462 of the Act that, if not
returned to the Secretary as excess allocations pursuant to
any of those sections, would otherwise lapse on September 30,
2005, and reallocate those funds in accordance with
subsection (b)(1).
SEC. 3. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION.
Section 2 of this Act is designated as an emergency
requirement pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th
Congress).
SEC. 4. TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.
The provisions of this Act shall cease to be effective one
year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Education.
(2) Affected student.--The term ``affected student'' means
an individual who has applied for or received student
financial assistance under title IV of the Act, and who--
(A) was enrolled or accepted for enrollment, as of August
29, 2005, at an institution of higher education in an area
affected by a Gulf hurricane disaster;
(B) was a dependent student enrolled or accepted for
enrollment at an institution of higher education that is not
in an area affected by a Gulf hurricane disaster, but whose
parents resided or were employed, as of August 29, 2005, in
an area affected by a Gulf hurricane disaster; or
(C) suffered direct economic hardship as a direct result of
a Gulf hurricane disaster, as determined by the Secretary
using consistent and objective criteria.
(3) Gulf hurricane disaster.--The term ``Gulf hurricane
disaster'' means a major disaster that the President declared
to exist, in accordance with section 401 of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 5170), and that was caused by Hurricane Katrina or
Hurricane Rita.
(4) Area affected by a gulf hurricane disaster.--The term
``area affected by a Gulf hurricane disaster'' means a county
or
[[Page H8363]]
parish, in an affected State, that has been designated by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency for disaster assistance
for individuals and households as a result of Hurricane
Katrina or Hurricane Rita.
(5) Affected state.--The term ``affected State'' means the
State of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, or Texas.
(6) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given
that term in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1002).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Jindal) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Tierney) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jindal).
General Leave
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 3863.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Louisiana?
There was no objection.
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I rise in support of H.R. 3863.
In my home State of Louisiana, several institutions of higher
education have been impacted by both Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,
literally dozens across the entire State.
The bill we are discussing today addresses an approaching deadline
for the Department of Education that requires the Department to
redistribute campus-based aid funds.
Currently, campus-based aid funds include the Federal Work Study
program, Perkins loans, and Supplemental Educational Opportunity
Grants.
Currently, schools that have additional campus-based aid funds are
required to return those funds to the Department. Under current law,
after September 30, the Department is required to redistribute the
funds to schools all over the country.
This bill we are discussing today would extend the September 30
deadline to allow the Department to recapture unspent funds and
reallocate them to the institutions that have taken in students from
Louisiana, from Mississippi, from Alabama, and from Texas.
In addition, the bill would allow the Department to give additional
campus-based aid funds to colleges in the affected States when they got
up and running again.
Waiving the Federal matching requirements will assist the financially
strapped institutions since the affected schools do not have matching
funds that are currently required to receive this funding.
The authority granted to the Secretary in this bill is important to
ensure that the affected institutions in the gulf coast region do not
experience additional financial strain and provides assistance to get
them back on their feet.
As the former president of the University of Louisiana system, a
system that comprises universities and colleges that have been impacted
directly by the storm, I truly understand the need to be flexible and
responsive and to help the neediest students in the affected
institutions in their time of need.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3863 is, in fact, a good bill, and I want to
congratulate my colleague for filing this bill and working on it.
Obviously, as he stated, the bill directs the Secretary of Education
to waive an institution's match requirement and to redistribute
millions of dollars in unused campus-based aid funds such as work study
and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants to students and
colleges that are impacted by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
The bill in the first instance states that the Secretary shall waive
those match requirements if, in fact, an institution is located in the
gulf area that is affected by the hurricanes, and it may waive them for
institutions that accept for enrollment any affected students after
considering an institution's student population, existing resources,
and applying objective and consistent criteria. That makes great sense.
Under current law already, colleges that participate in the campus-
based aid programs have to return any unused aid to the Secretary of
Education at the end of the year. Then the Secretary can reallocate
those funds to colleges that have an additional need or return the
money to the Treasury.
This bill gives the Secretary the instruction and the latitude to
take that money and redistribute it where it is most needed at this
particular time after the devastation of the storms. The Department of
Education estimates that this change could result in an additional $36
million of student aid to help affected students and colleges this
year.
I support this commonsense step and believe that it will provide
immediate relief to the affected colleges and students.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as she may consume to
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, this bipartisan bill could result in an
additional $36 million in aid this year for students and colleges
impacted by Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita. It is a commonsense
bill, and I am proud to rise in support of H.R. 3863; but we cannot
stop here.
Congress must do more to make college affordable for all students,
including victims of the hurricanes.
Unfortunately, the House probably will vote next month on H.R. 609, a
Republican bill that would increase the cost to students of Federal aid
by billions of dollars.
Ironically, one of the provisions of the Republican H.R. 609
legislation would change the formula for distributing campus-based aid
while not increasing the amount of that aid.
Earlier this summer, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney)
and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) offered an amendment in
committee that would have ensured that changes in the formula were not
tied to full increases but to real increases in aid; but the amendment
was defeated by the Republicans in our committee.
H.R. 609 simply would rob Peter to pay Paul, rather than address the
real problem, which is the Republican refusal to significantly increase
Pell grants and other grant aid to make colleges more affordable for
low- and middle-income families.
Of course, Mr. Speaker, I support what Congress is doing today
because it will help college students in the gulf region, but I
encourage everyone to keep an eye on what Congress does next month
because that will change what we do to help college students
nationwide.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, assuming that my colleague has no other
speakers, I yield myself such time as I shall consume.
I just want to, Mr. Speaker, highlight the point that the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Woolsey) finished with in her remarks.
If this bill is enacted, that she was talking about, H.R. 609, which,
in fact, redistributes the campus-based aid formula, these very States
that we are trying to help today, this afternoon, would be harmed. If
it was enacted and those funds were redistributed without adding
additional funds to protect schools that now receive assistance under
that provision, Louisiana would lose almost $1.2 million in work study
funds under the plan. Alabama would lose $1.3 million. Mississippi
would lose nearly $2.5 million in work study. So almost $4.5 million in
all the three campus-based aid programs.
This clearly does not make sense. Rearranging the deck chairs on a
sinking ship is not going to save that ship from going down.
In higher education, we have a tremendous obligation now to have more
children take advantage of college and graduate. It used to be a high
school education was enough to catapult a son or daughter into the
middle class. We all know today that that is not enough any longer,
that we really need to encourage 2 to 4 years beyond high school; and
in doing that, campus-based aid plays a very significant and important
role.
Redistributing the funds in such a way that you are taking them away
[[Page H8364]]
from some campuses and then putting them on other campuses is, in fact,
as the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) said, taking from
Peter to pay Paul.
The fact of the matter is we ought to increase the funding so that no
student loses current assistance and new students who should be getting
it do indeed receive the assistance that they need.
A reallocation of campus-based funds must include a significant boost
in that funding in order to continue our efforts here so we give more
children the responsibility and the opportunity to complete a college
degree.
The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) and I had offered that
amendment in committee. It failed on a tie vote, 24 to 24. We got
significant bipartisan support. In fact, a number of schools would be
impacted. More than 80 Members of Congress have signed a letter to the
committee asking them to take that offending provision that would
redistribute the funds without adding additional money, to take that
out of the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I will place in the Record at this point a list of each
of the States and how much money they would lose on campus-based aid if
that redistributed formula under H.R. 609 passed without adding more
funds in.
ESTIMATED CHANGE IN CAMPUS-BASED AID FUNDING--BASE GUARANTEE ELIMINATION PROPOSAL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEOG change in FWS change in Perkins change
allocation allocation in allocation Total change % Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama......................... $319,328 -$1,366,249 $193,908 -$853,013 -2.9
Alaska.......................... -357,194 -292,672 0 -649,866 -39.1
Arizona......................... 184,692 191,795 495,118 871,605 3.5
Arkansas........................ -109,651 -847,811 -223,204 -1,180,666 -8.8
California...................... 5,346,622 6,981,497 1,367,670 13,695,789 7.0
Colorado........................ 354,210 -35,688 -224,410 94,112 0.4
Connecticut..................... 68,743 744,203 -2,244 810,702 3.8
Delaware........................ 184,837 170,007 -4,868 349,976 10.5
District of Columbia............ 17,425 1,884,291 240,916 2,142,632 11.3
Florida......................... 1,894,571 2,956,506 1,975,050 6,826,127 9.1
Georgia......................... 1,172,369 -896,299 414,028 690,098 1.7
Hawaii.......................... -109,763 -161,240 -16,180 -287,183 -7.4
Idaho........................... -68,365 276,785 -146,554 61,866 1.2
Illinois........................ 1,582,535 1,975,747 -703,749 2,854,533 3.0
Indiana......................... 875,175 1,201,143 -164,648 1,911,670 5.0
Iowa............................ 268,598 1,088 -391,244 -121,558 -0.5
Kansas.......................... -609,378 -821,312 -693,636 -2,124,326 -14.6
Kentucky........................ 803,328 -1,518,496 -11,330 -726,498 -3.2
Louisiana....................... 915,018 -1,193,153 99,218 -178,917 -0.7
Maine........................... -3,346,280 -3,425,036 -460,794 -7,232,110 -46.5
Maryland........................ -262,256 272,230 43,102 53,076 0.2
Massachusetts................... -4,398,750 -4,886,369 -96,665 -9,381,784 -11.7
Michigan........................ -1,798,914 752,152 -1,213,575 -2,260,337 -4.0
Minnesota....................... -2,377,299 -1,248,027 -452,806 -4,078,132 -11.1
Mississippi..................... -1,282,404 -2,487,498 -700,467 -4,470,369 -20.0
Missouri........................ 923,933 945,748 -63,658 1,806,023 5.0
Montana......................... 241,460 -378,709 -177,076 -314,325 -5.2
Nebraska........................ 52,045 -138,681 -268,659 -355,295 -3.1
Nevada.......................... 195,286 295,456 66,199 556,941 13.2
New Hampshire................... -769,185 -1,502,087 -156,759 -2,428,031 -18.7
New Jersey...................... 501,889 450,066 106,108 1,058,063 2.8
New Mexico...................... -586,005 -2,183,573 -204,870 -2,974,448 -26.2
New York........................ 7,189,176 7,766,963 3,204,027 18,160,166 9.7
North Carolina.................. -1,820,724 -1,384,785 -88,970 -3,294,479 -8.0
North Dakota.................... -965,544 -577,921 2,866,841 1,323,376 19.9
Ohio............................ 775,727 46,677 620,384 1,442,788 2.0
Oklahoma........................ 36,553 -619,493 -456,089 -1,039,029 -5.3
Oregon.......................... -1,738,961 -889,047 -185,769 -2,813,777 -11.2
Pennsylvania.................... 2,514,303 4,595,845 1,265,707 8,375,855 7.5
Puerto Rico..................... 1,650,308 432,023 442,540 2,524,871 7.1
Rhode Island.................... 21,779 -533,551 36,572 -475,200 -2.8
South Carolina.................. 100,627 -789,970 97,811 -591,532 -2.5
South Dakota.................... -635,011 -1,360,964 -234,921 -2,230,896 -27.7
Tennessee....................... 5,768 -452,951 -6,719 -453,902 -1.4
Texas........................... 647,894 1,103,488 -1,236,695 514,687 0.5
Utah............................ -422,039 214,156 -477,662 -685,545 -6.4
Vermont......................... -2,382,485 -1,778,571 -264,202 -4,425,258 -37.7
Virginia........................ 854,144 -174,968 12,640 691,816 2.0
Washington...................... -844,292 771,689 -229,162 -301,765 -1.0
West Virginia................... -76,805 -302,606 -127,184 -506,595 -4.1
Wisconsin....................... -4,769,861 -1,419,305 -1,192,894 -7,382,060 -19.3
Wyoming......................... 16,325 112,844 -80,097 49,072 1.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE.--Total 29 states would lose funding under this proposal.
Source: American Council on Education, Center for Policy Analysis.
My colleagues will see that 29 States lose money overall, and in
fact, every State loses some aid through some of its campuses in one of
those three programs.
I just say again, we have an agreement on this particular bill today.
It makes sense to do what we are doing to help those affected in the
areas that were hurt by Hurricanes Rita and Katrina; but it makes
little sense to go through that effort to do that and at the same time,
in a week or two or from now, pass a bill that is going to rob them of
money of campus-based aid and leave them set back even further.
We can have it both ways. We can help them now through the
legislation that is currently on the floor, and we can do a better job
with H.R. 609 when it comes to the floor by adding in resources so that
existing student aid does not go down on campuses that are using it and
projected aid for those campuses that need additional funds, those
needs can be met, and all students and more students will have the
opportunity to have a college education so that they, too, can go into
the middle class and help make this country strong and its economy
strong as well.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am certainly sympathetic to what the gentleman and my colleague
have both referred to in terms of the provision in H.R. 609. Indeed, I
was one of the Republicans that actually voted for his amendment.
However, my understanding from the majority on the committee, the
rationale for the current language in H.R. 609, is that right now
campuses are keeping the financial aid they receive regardless of the
number of needy students they have enrolled on campus. The intent
behind H.R. 609 is, over a number of years, phase this out and allow
the funds to actually follow the needy students to whatever campuses
they may be on.
Regardless of the merits of both sides of this issue, certainly today
we are here to talk about a provision that will help those institutions
impacted by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I want to, first of all, thank
my colleagues both in the majority and across the aisle for their
support for today's legislation.
Certainly, nobody thinks today's legislation will solve all the
problems facing institutions of higher education in Louisiana, in
Texas, and Mississippi and Alabama; but today, with consideration of
this legislation, I do think we are taking an important step forward.
[[Page H8365]]
I also want to thank the Members across the aisle and the members of
my committee and the chairman in particular for not only moving so
quickly on this legislation but for, lastly, moving so quickly on
another piece of legislation that helps students directly, waiving some
of the requirements that they repay their Pell grants and their other
financial assistance if their studies were interrupted by Hurricane
Katrina.
{time} 1430
I certainly think with the steps we are taking today, we are
providing quick, flexible relief, both to students in great need, but
also their institutions of higher education.
I have literally spent hours visiting with the leaders of these
various institutions, campus presidents, with students visiting some of
the impacted campuses, and there are questions in their minds regarding
how they are to continue their studies, how are they going to continue
their payrolls, how are they going to get their facilities back in
preparation for welcoming students back to continuing their studies and
their research as the rebuilding process continues.
Again, as a former president of a university system, I know how
important these institutions are to the vitality, the economic growth,
and the well-being of the region and the families that have been so
devastated by these hurricanes. So I certainly thank my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle for their bipartisan support for this
legislation, and I want to thank the chairman and the House for moving
so quickly.
Again, this is not a comprehensive solution, but it is, again, a very
important first step forward.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill to protect
financial aid opportunities for students and schools affected by the
recent hurricanes in the gulf coast region.
I would like to thank my friend from Louisiana, Representative Bobby
Jindal, for his ongoing efforts to provide higher education assistance
to the victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. I would also like to
thank Representatives Miller, Kildee, and Hinojosa for working with us
in a bipartisan manner to provide critical higher education relief.
The Natural Disaster Student Aid Fairness Act protects financial aid
opportunities for students and schools affected by the recent
hurricanes by providing needed flexibility for the campus based aid
programs.
The three campus based aid programs--Supplemental Educational
Opportunity Grants (SEOG), Federal Work Study, and the Perkins Loan
program--provide valuable financial assistance to low- and middle-
income students.
The funds are allocated to colleges and universities, which then
combine Federal funds with their own dollars and award financial aid to
their students. Because the campus based aid programs are awarded to
institutions and require institutional matching funds, colleges and
universities impacted by the hurricanes are facing additional
challenges in maintaining these programs.
The Natural Disaster Student Aid Fairness Act allows the Secretary of
Education to waive the institutional matching requirements for
institutions affected by the gulf coast hurricanes and for institutions
whose financial aid budgets have been stretched more than anticipated
as they open their doors to affected students.
This flexibility will ensure colleges and universities are still able
to participate in the campus based aid programs as they work to rebuild
their campuses and serve their students.
The bill also extends the deadline for the Department of Education to
reallocate excess funds for these programs to provide ample time to
assess the needs of all participating institutions.
Moreover, the bill allows these excess funds to be targeted to the
institutions located in the affected regions or to the institutions
that have accepted displaced students.
The campus based aid programs have always been aimed at meeting the
needs of disadvantaged students. For the students and schools impacted
by the gulf coast hurricanes, the time of need is now. This bill will
provide much needed flexibility to ensure these funds are available to
the students and schools that need them the most.
Once again, I would like to thank the sponsor of this bill,
Representative Jindal, and members on both sides of the aisle for
working quickly on this bill to protect financial aid opportunities for
students and schools impacted by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Committee on Education and the Workforce, House of
Representatives,
Washington, DC, September 27, 2005.
Hon. Jim Nussle,
Chairman, Committee on the Budget, Cannon House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Nussle: I am writing concerning H.R. 3863,
the ``Natural Disaster Student Aid Fairness Act,'' which is
scheduled for floor consideration today. Section 3 of the
bill designates that any provision of Section 2 affecting
receipts, budget authority, or outlays in the bill will be
for emergency purposes pursuant to the budget resolution of
this year (H. Con. Res. 95). Thus, the Committee on Education
and the Workforce shares the jurisdiction with the Committee
on the Budget on this provision.
I recognize the Committee on the Budget's jurisdictional
interest in Section 3 of the bill, but ask that you allow
H.R. 3863 to go forward. I agree that by allowing the bill to
be considered, the Committee on the Budget does not
relinquish any jurisdiction over H.R. 3863 or similar
legislation. I would also support your request to be
represented on a conference on H.R. 3863, if one should
become necessary.
Finally, I will include my letter and your response in the
Congressional Record during floor consideration of the
measure.
Sincerely,
John A. Boehner,
Chairman.
____
Committee on the Budget,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, September 27, 2005.
Hon. John A. Boehner,
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce, Rayburn
House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Boehner: In recognition of the desire to
expedite floor consideration of H.R. 3863, the Natural
Disaster Student Aid Fairness Act, the Committee on the
Budget agrees to waive its right to consider this
legislation. H.R. 3863, as introduced on September 22, 2005,
contains subject matter that falls within the legislative
jurisdiction of the Committee on the Budget pursuant to rule
X of the Rules of the House of Representatives. Section 3 of
the bill, relating to the designation of provisions of the
bill as emergency requirements pursuant to section 402 of H.
Con. Res. 95, is of jurisdictional and substantive interest
to this Committee.
The Committee on the Budget appreciates the Education and
Workforce Committee's recognition of our jurisdictional
interest in section 3. The Budget Committee also appreciates
your offer to support any request we might make to be
represented on the conference for H.R. 3863. Finally, the
Committee on the Budget recognizes that the Committee on
Education and the Workforce retains sole jurisdiction over
all provisions of H.R. 3863 other than section 3.
Thank you for including our letters in the Congressional
Record during floor consideration.
Sincerely,
Jim Nussle,
Chairman.
Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the
Natural Disaster Student Aid Fairness Act.
Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita have caused destruction of
monumental proportions. First and foremost, our priority should remain
delivering food, water and other aid to those most in need. During this
time of national crisis we should tap every available resource of the
Federal Government to make sure that we are providing relief in every
corner of the devastated Gulf Coast region. This relief extends to the
colleges and universities that work so hard to provide our young people
with the skills they need to succeed.
This important legislation would allow the Secretary of Education to
grant waivers to colleges and universities affected by these disasters
that participate in Federal Campus-Based Aid programs such as SEOG and
Federal Work-Study. This would waive the requirement that participating
institutions of higher education provide matching Federal funds
provided to the institution for these programs.
I am pleased to see the speed at which legislation is being
considered to help students in the affected regions and applaud the
spirit of bipartisanship in addressing these important issues. I
commend the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jindal) for introducing this
legislation, and I thank the leadership for calling this legislation to
the floor so quickly.
Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill in a difficult hour. I strongly
encourage my colleagues to vote for it.
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bradley of New Hampshire). The question
is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jindal)
that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3863, as
amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________