[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 27, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H1919-H1921]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     PELL GRANT EQUITY ACT OF 2007

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the 
rules and pass the bill (H.R. 990) to provide all low-income students 
with the same opportunity to receive a Pell Grant by eliminating the 
tuition sensitivity provision in the Pell Grant program, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                H.R. 990

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Pell Grant Equity Act of 
     2007''.

     SEC. 2. TUITION SENSITIVITY.

        Section 401(b)(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1070a(b)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) This paragraph shall not apply to the determination 
     of a student's basic grant for the 2007-2008 academic 
     year.''.

     SEC. 3. GUARANTEE AGENCY COLLECTION RETENTION.

       Clause (ii) of section 428(c)(6)(A) of the Higher Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1078(c)(6)(A)(ii)) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(ii) an amount equal to 24 percent of such payments for 
     use in accordance with section 422B, except that--

       ``(I) beginning October 1, 2003 and ending September 30, 
     2007, this subparagraph shall be applied by substituting `23 
     percent' for `24 percent'; and
       ``(II) beginning October 1, 2007 and ending September 30, 
     2008, this subparagraph shall be applied by substituting `22 
     percent' for `24 percent'.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. George Miller) and the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McKeon) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. George 
Miller).

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Today, Mr. Speaker, I rise in 
support of H.R. 990, the Pell Grant Equity Act of 2007.
  This is a bill that is designed to adjust an inequity in the current 
law that works against the interest of many college students in those 
States that have low tuition.
  At a time when we have seen tuition and fees of public colleges and 
universities increase significantly, there is a notable exception to 
that trend, and that is that California community colleges recently 
decreased their tuition and fees from $26 a credit to $20 a credit. For 
a student taking 13 credits for two semesters, they save $520 in 
tuition for the year. This is almost unheard of in a day of 
skyrocketing college costs. Unfortunately, a provision in the Higher 
Education Act penalizes students attending low-cost institutions, such 
as California's community colleges.
  The provision known as ``tuition sensitivity'' reduces the Pell Grant 
for the neediest of students attending higher education institutions 
with the lowest tuition. The result is that thousands of low-income 
students receive a lesser Pell Grant.
  The Pell Grant Equity Act eliminates this discriminating provision in 
the law, ensuring that students receive the full amount of the Pell 
Grants they are entitled to receive. This is a very important bill for 
these students and for their families.

[[Page H1920]]

  This is legislation that my colleague, Mr. McKeon, the senior 
Republican on the committee, worked very hard last year to get into the 
Higher Education Act. It was passed on the floor of the Congress. He 
worked very hard to bring this matter to the attention of all of the 
Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, but as you know, that 
legislation was not passed in the end, and that is why we are here 
today because this has an immediate impact on those students who find 
themselves in this situation. And I want to thank him for all of the 
effort that he made to adjust this inequity in the law over the last 
couple of years as we have tried to deal with this within the Higher 
Education Act.
  This bill is a 1-year fix, and we do so because we anticipate that 
this would cover the upcoming academic year. And we would hope to be 
able to make the permanent changes when we reauthorize the Higher 
Education Act in this Congress.
  According to the Congressional Research Service, our bill will help 
approximately 96,000 students receive an average of $100 more in a Pell 
Grant aid. Sometimes that doesn't sound like a lot of money, but in 
grant aid to these students and these families, this is an important 
amount of money because it is not just the tuition that is going down, 
it is other costs continue to go up.
  This increase will help make a real difference for these students in 
meeting not just their tuition costs, but the costs of their books, 
their supplies, transportation, room and board, and expenses that 
quickly add up.
  We know this is an issue because we have received letters and heard 
stories from the community colleges, from the students and from their 
families. It is a situation where you can find two siblings, one at Cal 
State school and another at a nearby community college. Both students 
take similar courses, enrolled full-time, live at home, commute to 
colleges, both have filed Federal financial aid forms and have an 
expected family contribution of zero. So both qualify for the maximum 
Pell Grant. Due to the current rules, the sibling attending the 
community college will receive $402 less, even though the educational 
costs overall are the same for those two individuals.
  That is why we need to pass this legislation today. It has strong 
bipartisan support. And it will keep the Pell Grant as a strong part of 
our Federal student aid program targeted to those in the most need.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 990, the 
Pell Grant Equity Act.
  I thank my friend and colleague, Chairman Miller, for his work on 
this legislation. I also thank Ranking Member Keller of the Higher 
Education Subcommittee and Chairman Hinojosa for working with us on 
this measure.
  The Pell Grant Equity Act will repeal a Federal rule known as 
``tuition sensitivity.'' This arcane rule reduces the annual maximum 
Pell Grant for students attending institutions with very low tuition 
charges.
  In a time when we are trying to keep the cost of education down, we 
penalize students that choose to go to a school that is charging less 
tuition. It seems like we have it really mixed up, and I am glad this 
bill is coming out to help us change that. Simply put, Mr. Speaker, a 
student should not be forced to sacrifice grant aid because of their 
choice of one institution over another.
  As Congress and the President work to continue improving student aid 
programs, it is illogical that certain students who may otherwise be 
eligible for a maximum Pell Grant won't get it simply because of where 
they go to school. Moreover, repealing this rule takes away an 
incentive for some low-cost institutions to raise their tuition in 
order for their students to become eligible for the maximum Pell award.
  The tuition sensitivity rule is estimated to impact between 90,000 
and 100,000 students each year, with these students losing hundreds of 
dollars in grant aid annually, the students that need it the most.
  With many California community colleges reducing their cost of 
attendance this semester, the tuition sensitivity rule is expected to 
have an even more substantial impact for students in that State if not 
corrected.
  So I am especially pleased, just as I am sure Chairman Miller is, 
that this measure will benefit many of those seeking postsecondary 
education in our home State.
  Mr. Speaker, I must say that as much as I support this bill, I wish 
it could have been the law of the land much sooner. This measure was 
included in the College Access and Opportunity Act, which the House 
passed last year to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. Similarly, 
had House Republicans, or anyone else for that matter, been able to 
offer this as an amendment to H.R. 5 earlier this year, I would have 
done so.
  As is often the case in Washington, it is better late than never. I 
am pleased to support this measure which helps students and is fully 
paid for in accordance with the budget rules.
  Again, I thank my colleagues. And I hope we can find more 
opportunities for bipartisan cooperation on college access down the 
road.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. 
Keller, such time as he may consume.
  Mr. KELLER of Florida. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the ranking member on the Higher 
Education Committee and a strong supporter of the Pell Grant program to 
urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Pell Grant Equity Act of 
2007.
  The rationale for this legislation is pretty simple: It is unfair 
that 100,000 college students are penalized for attending community 
colleges with low tuition rates. These students will now be able to use 
the additional $108 in Pell funding, on average, to pay for legitimate 
education expenses beyond tuition, such as books and mandatory lab fees 
in their science classes.
  At a time when college tuition is skyrocketing across the Nation, we 
should praise and not punish those community colleges who are doing 
their part to keep tuition low and reward those students who are going 
to those colleges who otherwise wouldn't have a chance at the American 
Dream of a college education.
  I want to praise Chairman Miller and Chairman Hinojosa as well as 
Ranking Member McKeon for their leadership and moving this legislation 
along. I think it is a great piece of bipartisan legislation that 
deserves all of our support, and I urge all of my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to vote ``yes'' on this bill.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank Chairman Miller for 
bringing this legislation, for his kind words, and the opportunity to 
work together, something that will benefit students who are in great 
need of this extra help.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, earlier in the first 
few hours of this session, this Congress took a bipartisan vote to cut 
interest rates for the neediest students who are borrowing money. Those 
same group of students, many of them are still eligible for the Pell 
Grant. This action we take today, again on a bipartisan basis, I think 
will be very helpful to these students and to their families as, again, 
they try to put together the resources necessary so that they can begin 
their advanced education in the higher education system in this case. 
Hopefully in community colleges, they will continue to try to figure 
out, along with the State legislatures, how to lower the cost of that 
college. And this would provide an additional incentive, since they 
know now that those students will not be punished in a sense because 
they are going to a lower cost college at that time.
  I would like to thank the staff of both committees for all of the 
work they did on this, for the senior Republican, Mr. Keller, on the 
subcommittee, and Mr. McKeon on the full committee, and to Mr. 
Hinojosa, the chairman of the subcommittee, for all of their work. We 
look forward to a quick passage here and hopefully a speedy passage in 
the Senate.
  Mr. HARE. Mr. Speaker, part of our job in Congress is to ensure that 
every American has the right to a higher education. Unfortunately, a 
provision in the Higher Education Act makes it difficult for people of 
low incomes who attend schools with low tuitions to receive the 
assistance they need.
  I rise in strong support of the Pell Grant Equity Act, which provides 
low-income students

[[Page H1921]]

the opportunity to go to college by eliminating the ``tuition 
sensitivity provision.'' This provision prohibits maximum Pell grant 
awards to students attending low-tuition institutions of higher 
education even if their income is low enough to otherwise qualify for 
the maximum award.
  As implemented by the U.S. Department of Education, ``tuition 
sensitivity'' is intended to reduce the Pell grant for low-income 
students who attend very low tuition schools as a cost-saving measure. 
Unfortunately, the students most negatively impacted by this policy are 
the poorest students who still cannot afford the lower tuition.
  As I have been saying throughout my district this past week, 
education is an investment not an expenditure. We must invest in our 
students now or be forced to pay more later. We can start this 
investment by passing the Pell Grant Equity Act, allowing approximately 
96,000 of our poorest students to receive the financial assistance they 
need in the upcoming academic year.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in 
support of H.R. 990--The Pell Grant Equity Act of 2007. This 
legislation is a simple measure to reduce the real and perceived 
barriers to a higher education for many low-income families across the 
United States.
  Community colleges and other low-cost institutions offer life-
changing educational opportunities for motivated students. Pell grant 
recipients are by definition motivated.
  The Pell grant program works as a contract between the Federal 
Government and the individual. The Government says, ``we will provide 
you with the means to get a higher education if you desire to invest in 
yourself.''
  Removing the tuition sensitivity provision of the Higher Education 
Act will help students cover the full cost of attending college, which 
is significantly higher than tuition alone.
  For over 30 years, Congress has consistently increased funding 
available to the Pell grant program and increased the maximum grant 
that each student can receive. Why? Because the program works. Pell 
grant recipients regularly go on to succeed in jobs with career 
potential and upward mobility.
  Increased access to higher education is an important goal for the 
Congress because having an educated workforce is essential to our 
country's future. As former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan 
once said to me, ``if our people are educated there isn't a problem we 
can't solve. If they aren't, there isn't one that we can.'' Eliminating 
tuition sensitivity from the Pell grant program is a positive step 
towards making college education available to everyone who wants one, 
and there isn't a higher goal than that.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of 
H.R. 990, which will provide all low-income students with the same 
opportunity to receive a Pell grant by eliminating the ``tuition 
sensitivity'' provision in the Pell grant program. The Federal Pell 
grant is need-based aid that serves as the foundation of a student's 
financial aid package. In fiscal year 2006, more than 5 million 
undergraduate students received the Pell grant scholarship, with 74 
percent of these recipients having a combined family income below 
$30,000.
  Mr. Speaker, under current law Pell grants are awarded to students 
based on the difference between the appropriated maximum Pell grant 
award and the student's expected family contribution, which is a 
measure of the student's and their family's ability to pay for 
education expenses.
  The ``tuition sensitivity'' provision of the Pell grant comes into 
effect when the appropriated award is above $2,7000.00. The provision 
then reduces the Pell grant scholarship, received by the poorest 
students attending institutions with the lowest tuition. As a result of 
this provision, two students with the same low-income background and 
family expenses could be awarded different amounts for the Pell grant 
although they are both entitled to receive the maximum amount.
  Although both students share the same economic hardships, the student 
attending the college with the lower tuition would receive a smaller 
Pell grant, thus requiring their expected personal and family expenses 
to the institution to rise. However, if these same two students 
attended universities with matching tuition expenses, the award amounts 
would be equal.
  Just because a student attends a school with low tuition, that does 
not mean that he or she can expend more from their personal and family 
income. A needy student should receive the same amount regardless of 
their institution's tuition.
  Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 990, which would provide all low-income 
students with the same opportunity to receive a Pell grant by 
eliminating the tuition sensitivity provision in the Pell grant. Every 
student in our Nation who plans to further their education, whether at 
our Nation's most expensive or least expensive schools, deserves that 
opportunity. Our Federal Government has made the provisions to 
financially assist students, especially those from low-income families, 
in their quest to attend college and we must ensure that every student 
has this opportunity.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support for 
H.R. 990, the Pell Grant Equity Act.
  This important piece of legislation would amend the Higher Education 
Act of 1965 to provide all low-income students with the same 
opportunity to receive a Pell grant by eliminating the tuition 
sensitivity provision in the Pell grant program.
  Current law prohibits maximum Pell grant awards to students attending 
low-tuition higher education institutions even if their income is low 
enough to otherwise qualify for the maximum award.
  As the husband of a retired high-school teacher, I have always been a 
strong advocate for education.
  Unfortunately, the high costs of a college education prohibit many 
low-income students from receiving a higher degree.
  Pell grants provide low-income students with their best opportunity 
to attend college, and we must support financial aid programs like this 
in order to help as many students as possible succeed and receive a 
college degree.
  Higher education is the best way to ensure our children and 
grandchildren have a promising future regardless of socio-economic 
status.
  I thank my colleagues for supporting this bill.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join Chairman Miller and 
Ranking Members McKeon and Keller in cosponsoring the Pell Grant Equity 
Act. I would like to thank them for their leadership in bringing this 
bill forward without delay.
  Currently low-income students who attend low-cost institutions have 
their Pell Grants reduced because of the provision called ``tuition 
sensitivity'' in current law. It is contrary to common sense and our 
shared goals of providing access to higher education for low-income 
students to systematically reduce the grant aid for the neediest 
students who often attend low-cost institutions because they are more 
affordable.
  According to the Congressional Research Service, our action today 
will benefit 96,000 low-income students and increase their Pell grant 
by an average of $108. When you are a low-income student, every penny 
counts and this increase will make a real difference.
  The colleges in my congressional district serve some of the lowest 
income students and families in the Nation. They work very hard to keep 
tuition low and limit increases to a minimum. This legislation will 
ensure that their efforts to contain costs are not undone by aid policy 
that reduces the Pell Grant because the institution charges low 
tuition.
  The Pell Grant Equity Act will immediately lift tuition sensitivity 
for the upcoming academic year. As we move towards the reauthorization 
of the Higher Education Act, we will make this repeal permanent and put 
all low-income students on an equal footing in the Pell grant program.
  I look forward to continuing this spirit of bipartisanship as we 
consider the rest of the Higher Education Act and thank my colleagues 
for treating this issue with the sense of urgency it deserves.
  I strongly encourage all my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) that the House suspend 
the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 990, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``To provide all 
low-income students with the same opportunity to receive a Pell Grant 
by suspending the tuition sensitivity provision in the Pell Grant 
program.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________