[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 110 (Wednesday, July 11, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H7506-H7558]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
COLLEGE COST REDUCTION ACT OF 2007
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House
Resolution 531, I call up the bill (H.R. 2669) to provide for
reconciliation pursuant to section 601 of the concurrent resolution on
the budget for fiscal year 2008, and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2669
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be referred to as the
``College Cost Reduction Act of 2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. References; effective date.
TITLE I--INVESTING IN STUDENT AID
Part A--Increasing the Purchasing Power of Pell Grants
Sec. 101. Mandatory Pell Grant Increases.
Sec. 102. Support for working students.
Sec. 103. Simplified needs test and automatic zero improvements.
Sec. 104. Definitions.
Part B--Making Student Loans More Affordable
Sec. 111. Interest rate reductions.
Sec. 112. Increases in loan limits.
Sec. 113. Reduction of lender special allowance payments.
Sec. 114. Elimination of exceptional performer status for lenders.
Sec. 115. Reduction of lender insurance percentage.
Sec. 116. Guaranty agency collection retention.
Sec. 117. Unit costs for account maintenance fees.
Sec. 118. Increased loan fees from lenders.
Sec. 119. Student loan information.
Part C--Rewarding Service in Repayment
Sec. 141. Loan forgiveness for service in areas of national need.
``Sec. 428K. Loan forgiveness for service in areas of national need.
Sec. 142. Income contingent repayment for public sector employees.
Sec. 143. Income-based repayment.
``Sec. 493C. Income-based repayment.
Sec. 144. Definition of economic hardship.
Sec. 145. Deferrals.
Sec. 146. Maximum repayment period.
TITLE II--REDUCING THE COST OF COLLEGE
Sec. 201. State commitment to affordable college education.
``Sec. 132. State commitment to affordable college education.
Sec. 202. Consumer information and public accountability in higher
education.
``Sec. 131. Consumer information and public accountability in higher
education.
Sec. 203. Incentives and rewards for low tuition.
``Sec. 401B. Incentives and rewards for low tuition.
Sec. 204. Cooperative education rewards for institutions that restrain
tuition increases.
``TITLE VIII--COOPERATIVE EDUCATION REWARDS FOR INSTITUTIONS THAT
RESTRAIN TUITION INCREASES
``Sec. 801. Eligible institutions.
[[Page H7507]]
``Sec. 802. Authorization of appropriations; reservations.
``Sec. 803. Grants for cooperative education.
``Sec. 804. Demonstration and innovation projects; training and
resource centers; and research.
TITLE III--ENSURING A HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHER IN EVERY CLASSROOM
Part A--TEACH Grants
Sec. 301. TEACH Grants.
``Subpart 9--TEACH Grants
``Sec. 420L. Program established.
``Sec. 420M. Eligibility; applications; selection.
``Sec. 420N. Definitions.
``Sec. 420O. Program period and funding.
Part B--Centers of Excellence
Sec. 311. Centers of excellence.
``Part C--Centers of Excellence
``Sec. 231. Definitions.
``Sec. 232. Centers of excellence.
``Sec. 233. Appropriations.
TITLE IV--COLLEGE ACCESS CHALLENGE GRANT PROGRAM
Sec. 401. College Access Challenge grants.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES; EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) References.--Except as otherwise expressly provided,
whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in
terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other
provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a
section or other provision of the Higher Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.).
(b) Effective Date.--Except as otherwise expressly provided
therein, the amendments made by this Act shall be effective
on October 1, 2007.
TITLE I--INVESTING IN STUDENT AID
PART A--INCREASING THE PURCHASING POWER OF PELL GRANTS
SEC. 101. MANDATORY PELL GRANT INCREASES.
(a) Extension of Authority.--Section 401(a) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(a)) is amended by striking ``fiscal year 2004'' and
inserting ``fiscal year 2013''.
(b) Funding for Increases.--Section 401(b) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(9) Additional funds.--
``(A) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated,
and there are appropriated, to carry out subparagraph (B) of
this paragraph (in addition to any other amounts appropriated
to carry out this section and out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated) the following amounts:
``(i) $420,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
``(ii) $870,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
``(iii) $1,330,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
``(iv) $1,820,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
``(v) $2,340,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
``(vi) $2,390,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
``(vii) $2,430,000,000 for fiscal year 2014;
``(viii) $2,470,000,000 for fiscal year 2015;
``(ix) $2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2016; and
``(x) $2,520,000,000 for fiscal year 2017.
``(B) Increase in federal pell grants.--The amounts made
available pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph
shall be used to increase the amount of the maximum Pell
Grant for which a student shall be eligible during an award
year, as specified in the last enacted appropriation Act
applicable to that award year, by--
``(i) $100 for award year 2008-2009;
``(ii) $200 for award year 2009-2010;
``(iii) $300 for award year 2010-2011;
``(iv) $400 for award year 2011-2012; and
``(v) $500 for award year 2012-2013 and each subsequent
award year.
``(C) Use of fiscal year funds for award years.--The
amounts made available by subparagraph (A) for any fiscal
year shall be available and remain available for use under
subparagraph (B) for the award year that begins in such
fiscal year.''.
(c) Authorized Maximums.--Section 401(b)(2)(A) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(b)(2)(A)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2)(A) The amount of the Federal Pell Grant for a student
eligible under this part shall be--
``(i) $7,600 for academic year 2008-2009;
``(ii) $8,600 for academic year 2009-2010;
``(iii) $9,600 for academic year 2010-2011;
``(iv) $10,600 for academic year 2011-2012;
``(v) $11,600 for academic year 2012-2013,
less an amount equal to the amount determined to be the
expected family contribution with respect to that student for
that year.''.
(d) Tuition Sensitivity.--
(1) Amendment.--Section 401(b) (20 U.S.C. 1070a(b)) is
further amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (3); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (9) as
paragraphs (3) through (8), respectively.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1)
of this subsection are effective on the date of enactment of
this Act.
(e) Multiple Grants.--Paragraph (5) of section 401(b) (as
redesignated by subsection (d)(2)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(5) Year-round pell grants.--The Secretary is authorized,
for students enrolled full time in a baccalaureate or
associate's degree program of study at an eligible
institution, to award such students not more than two Pell
grants during an award year to permit such students to
accelerate progress toward their degree objectives by
enrolling in academic programs for 12 months rather than 9
months.''.
(f) Academic Competitiveness Grants.--Section 401A (as
amended by section 8003 of Public Law 109-171) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(3)(A)(ii), by inserting ``, except as
part of a secondary school program of study'' before the
semicolon;
(2) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
(3) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new
subsection:
``(g) Determination of Academic Year.--Notwithstanding
section 481(a)(2), for the purpose of determining eligibility
for a grant under this section, a student shall be considered
to be enrolled or accepted for enrollment in the first,
second, third, or fourth academic year of a program of
undergraduate education based on the student's class
standing, as determined by the institution of higher
education at which the student is enrolled or accepted for
enrollment.''.
SEC. 102. SUPPORT FOR WORKING STUDENTS.
(a) Dependent Students.--Subparagraph (D) of section
475(g)(2) (20 U.S.C. 1087oo)(g)(2)(D)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(D) an income protection allowance of the following
amount (or a successor amount prescribed by the Secretary
under section 478)--
``(i) for the 2009-2010 academic year, $3,750;
``(ii) for the 2010-2011 academic year, $4,500;
``(iii) for the 2011-2012 academic year, $5,250; and
``(iv) for the 2012-2013 academic year, $6,000;''.
(b) Independent Students Without Dependents Other Than a
Spouse.--Clause (iv) of section 476(b)(1)(A) (20 U.S.C.
1087pp(b)(1)(A)(iv)) is amended to read as follows:
``(iv) an income protection allowance of the following
amount (or a successor amount prescribed by the Secretary
under section 478)--
``(I) for single or separated students, or married students
where both are enrolled pursuant to subsection (a)(2)--
``(aa) for the 2009-2010 academic year, $6,690;
``(bb) for the 2010-2011 academic year, $7,160;
``(cc) for the 2011-2012 academic year, $7,630; and
``(dd) for the 2012-2013 academic year, $8,090; and
``(II) for married students where 1 is enrolled pursuant to
subsection (a)(2)--
``(aa) for the 2009-2010 academic year, $10,720;
``(bb) for the 2010-2011 academic year, $11,470;
``(cc) for the 2011-2012 academic year, $12,220; and
``(dd) for the 2012-2013 academic year, $12,960;''.
(c) Updated Tables and Amounts.--Section 478(b) (20 U.S.C.
1087rr(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``Revised tables.--For each'' and inserting
``Revised tables.--
``(A) In general.--For each'';
(B) in subparagraph (A) (as designated by subparagraph
(A)), in the third sentence--
(i) by striking ``preceding sentence'' and inserting
``subparagraph (A)''; and
(ii) by striking ``For the 2007-2008'' and inserting the
following:
``(B) Special rule for 2007-2008 academic year.--For the
2007-2008''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Special rule for 2009-2010 through 2012-2013 academic
years.--For the 2009-2010 academic year, and for each of the
3 succeeding academic years, the Secretary shall revise the
tables in accordance with this paragraph, except that, for
the table in section 477(b)(4), the Secretary shall revise
such table by increasing the amounts contained in such table
for the preceding academic year by 10 percent.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``shall be developed''
and all that follows through the period at the end and
inserting ``shall be developed--
``(A) for academic year 2008-2009, by increasing each of
the dollar amounts contained in such section as such section
was in effect on the day before the date of enactment of the
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 by a percentage equal to
the estimated percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index
(as determined by the Secretary) between December 2006 and
the December next preceding the beginning of such academic
year, and rounding the result to the nearest $10; and
``(B) for each academic year after 2012-2013, by increasing
each of the dollar amounts contained in such section for
academic year 2012-2013 by a percentage equal to the
estimated percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (as
determined by the Secretary) between December 2006 and the
December next preceding the beginning of such academic year,
and rounding the result to the nearest $10;''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (a)
and (b) shall take effect on October 1, 2008, and the
amendment made by subsection (c) shall take effect on July 1,
2008.
SEC. 103. SIMPLIFIED NEEDS TEST AND AUTOMATIC ZERO
IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) Simplified Needs Test.--Section 479 (20 U.S.C. 1087ss)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A)(i)--
(i) in subclause (II), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(ii) by redesignating subclause (III) as subclause (IV);
[[Page H7508]]
(iii) by inserting after subclause (II) the following:
``(III) 1 of whom is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(iv) in subclause (IV) (as redesignated by clause (ii)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)(i)--
(i) in subclause (II), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(ii) by redesignating subclause (III) as subclause (IV);
(iii) by inserting after subclause (II) the following:
``(III) 1 of whom is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(iv) in subclause (IV) (as redesignated by clause (ii)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month'';
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in clause (ii), by striking ``or'' after the semicolon;
(II) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv);
(III) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
``(iii) 1 of whom is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(IV) in clause (iv) (as redesignated by subclause (II)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$20,000'' and
inserting ``$30,000''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in clause (ii), by striking ``or'' after the semicolon;
(II) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv);
(III) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
``(iii) is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(IV) in clause (iv) (as redesignated by subclause (II)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$20,000'' and
inserting ``$30,000''; and
(C) in the flush matter following paragraph (2)(B), by
adding at the end the following: ``The Secretary shall
annually adjust the income level necessary to qualify an
applicant for the zero expected family contribution. The
income level shall be adjusted according to increases in the
Consumer Price Index, as defined in section 478(f).''; and
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (6) as
subparagraphs (A) through (F), respectively;
(B) by striking ``(d) Definition'' and all that follows
through ``the term'' and inserting the following:
``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Dislocated worker.--The term `dislocated worker' has
the meaning given the term in section 101 of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801).
``(2) Means-tested federal benefit program.--The term''.
(b) Discretion of Student Financial Aid Administrators.--
Section 479A(a) (20 U.S.C. 1087tt(a)) is amended in the third
sentence by inserting ``a family member who is a dislocated
worker (as defined in section 101 of the Workforce Investment
Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801)),'' after ``recent unemployment
of a family member,''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall be effective on July 1, 2009.
SEC. 104. DEFINITIONS.
(a) Total Income.--Section 480(a) (20 U.S.C. 1087vv(a)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting before the period at the
end the following: ``, except that the Secretary may, by
regulation, provide for the use of the previous tax year when
and to the extent necessary to carry out the sense of
Congress in section 133 of the College Cost Reduction Act of
2007''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking ``and no portion'' and inserting ``no
portion''; and
(B) by inserting ``and no distribution from any qualified
education benefit described in subsection (f)(3) that is not
subject to Federal income tax,'' after ``1986,''.
(b) Untaxed Income and Benefits.--Section 480(b) (20 U.S.C.
1087vv(b)) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Untaxed Income and Benefits.--
``(1) The term `untaxed income and benefits' means--
``(A) child support received;
``(B) workman's compensation;
``(C) veteran's benefits such as death pension, dependency,
and indemnity compensation, but excluding veterans' education
benefits as defined in subsection (c);
``(D) interest on tax-free bonds;
``(E) housing, food, and other allowances (excluding rent
subsidies for low-income housing) for military, clergy, and
others (including cash payments and cash value of benefits);
``(F) cash support or any money paid on the student`s
behalf, except, for dependent students, funds provided by the
student's parents;
``(G) untaxed portion of pensions;
``(H) payments to individual retirement accounts and Keogh
accounts excluded from income for Federal income tax
purposes; and
``(I) any other untaxed income and benefits, such as Black
Lung Benefits, Refugee Assistance, railroad retirement
benefits, or Job Training Partnership Act noneducational
benefits or benefits received through participation in
employment and training activities under title I of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
``(2) The term `untaxed income and benefits' shall not
include the amount of additional child tax credit claimed for
Federal income tax purposes.''.
(c) Assets.--Section 480(f) (20 U.S.C. 1087vv(f)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``shall not be considered
an asset of a student for purposes of section 475'' and
inserting ``shall be considered an asset of the parent for
purposes of section 475'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(5) and (6), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) A qualified education benefit shall be considered an
asset of the student for purposes of section 476 and 477.''.
(d) Other Financial Assistance.--Section 480(j)(2) (20
U.S.C. 1087vv(j)(2)) is amended by inserting ``, or a
distribution that is not includable in gross income under
section 529 of such Code, under another prepaid tuition plan
offered by a State, or under a Coverdell education savings
account under section 530 of such Code,'' after ``1986''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall be effective on July 1, 2009.
PART B--MAKING STUDENT LOANS MORE AFFORDABLE
SEC. 111. INTEREST RATE REDUCTIONS.
(a) FFEL Interest Rates.--
(1) Section 427A(l) (20 U.S.C. 1077a(l)) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Reduced rates for undergraduate subsidized loans.--
Notwithstanding subsection (h) and paragraph (1) of this
subsection, with respect to any loan to an undergraduate
student made, insured, or guaranteed under this part (other
than a loan made pursuant to section 428B, 428C, or 428H) for
which the first disbursement is made on or after July 1,
2006, and before July 1, 2013, the applicable rate of
interest shall be as follows:
``(A) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2006, and before July 1, 2008, 6.80
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(B) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2008, and before July 1, 2009, 6.12
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(C) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2009, and before July 1, 2010, 5.44
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(D) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2010, and before July 1, 2011, 4.76
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(E) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2011, and before July 1, 2012, 4.08
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(F) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2012 and before July 1, 2013, 3.40
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.''.
(2) Special allowance cross reference.--Section
438(b)(2)(I)(ii)(II) (20 U.S.C. 1086(b)(2)(I)(ii)(II)) is
amended by striking ``section 427A(l)(1)'' and inserting
``section 427A(l)(1) or (l)(4)''.
(b) Direct Loan Interest Rates.--Section 455(b)(7) (20
U.S.C. 1087e(b)(7)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraph:
``(D) Reduced rates for undergraduate fdsl.--
Notwithstanding the preceding paragraphs of this subsection,
for Federal Direct Stafford Loans made to undergraduate
students for which the first disbursement is made on or after
July 1, 2006, and before July 1, 2013, the applicable rate of
interest shall be as follows:
``(i) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2006, and before July 1, 2008, 6.80
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(ii) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2008, and before July 1, 2009, 6.12
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(iii) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2009, and before July 1, 2010, 5.44
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(iv) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2010, and before July 1, 2011, 4.76
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(v) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2011, and before July 1, 2012, 4.08
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(vi) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2012, and before July 1, 2013, 3.40
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.''.
SEC. 112. INCREASES IN LOAN LIMITS.
(a) Increase in Third and Subsequent Year Limits.--
(1) Federal insurance limits.--Section 425(a)(1)(A)(iii)
(20 U.S.C. 1075(a)(1)(A)(iii)) is amended by striking
``$5,500'' and inserting ``$7,500''.
(2) Guaranty limits.--Section 428(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I) (20
U.S.C. 1078(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I)) is amended by striking
``$5,500'' and inserting ``$7,500''.
(b) Increase in Aggregate Limits.--
(1) Federal insurance limits.--Section 425(a)(2)(A) (20
U.S.C. 1075(a)(2)(A)(i)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``$23,000'' and inserting
``$30,500''; and
[[Page H7509]]
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``$65,500'' and inserting
``$73,000''.
(2) Guaranty limits.--Section 428(b)(1)(B) (20 U.S.C.
1078(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``$23,000'' and inserting
``$30,500''; and
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``$65,500'' and inserting
``$73,000''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall be effective July 1, 2008.
SEC. 113. REDUCTION OF LENDER SPECIAL ALLOWANCE PAYMENTS.
Section 438(b)(2)(I) (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b)(2)(I)) is
amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``clauses (ii), (iii), and
(iv)'' and inserting ``the following clauses''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(vi) Reduction for loans on or after october 1, 2007.--
With respect to a loan on which the applicable interest rate
is determined under section 427A(l), the percentage to be
added under clause (i)(III) in computing the special
allowance payment pursuant to this subparagraph shall be the
following:
``(I) In general and plus loans.--1.79 percent in the case
of a loan described in clause (i) or (iii) for which the
first disbursement of principal is made on or after October
1, 2007.
``(II) In school and grace period.--1.19 percent in the
case of a loan described in clause (ii)(II) for which the
first disbursement of principal is made on or after October
1, 2007.
``(III) Consolidation loans.--2.09 percent in the case of a
loan described in clause (iv) for which the first
disbursement of principal is made on or after October 1,
2007''.
SEC. 114. ELIMINATION OF EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMER STATUS FOR
LENDERS.
(a) Elimination of Status.--Part B of title IV (20 U.S.C.
1071 et seq.) is amended by striking section 428I (20 U.S.C.
1078-9).
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Part B of title IV is further
amended--
(1) in section 428(c)(1) (20 U.S.C. 1078(c)(1))--
(A) by striking subparagraph (D); and
(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) through (H) as
subparagraphs (D) through (G), respectively; and
(2) in section 438(b)(5) (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b)(5)), by
striking the matter following subparagraph (B).
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (a)
and (b) shall take effect on October 1, 2007.
SEC. 115. REDUCTION OF LENDER INSURANCE PERCENTAGE.
(a) Amendment.--Subparagraph (G) of section 428(b)(1) (20
U.S.C. 1078(b)(1)(G)) is amended to read as follows:
``(G) insures 95 percent of the unpaid principal of loans
insured under the program, except that--
``(i) such program shall insure 100 percent of the unpaid
principal of loans made with funds advanced pursuant to
section 428(j) or 439(q); and
``(ii) notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this
subparagraph, such program shall insure 100 percent of the
unpaid principal amount of exempt claims as defined in
subsection (c)(1)(G);''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect with respect to loans made on or after
October 1, 2007.
SEC. 116. GUARANTY AGENCY COLLECTION RETENTION.
Clause (ii) of section 428(c)(6)(A) (20 U.S.C.
1078(c)(6)(A)(ii)) is amended to read as follows:
``(ii) an amount equal to 23 percent of such payments for
use in accordance with section 422B, except that beginning
October 1, 2007, this subparagraph shall be applied by
substituting `16 percent' for `23 percent'.''.
SEC. 117. UNIT COSTS FOR ACCOUNT MAINTENANCE FEES.
Section 458(b) (20 U.S.C. 1087h(b)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Account'' and inserting the following:
``(1) For fiscal years 2006 and 2007.--For fiscal years
2006 and 2007, account''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) For fiscal year 2008 and succeeding fiscal years.--
``(A) Unit cost basis.--For fiscal year 2008 and each
succeeding fiscal year, the Secretary shall calculate the
account maintenance fees payable to guaranty agencies under
subsection (a)(3), on a per-loan cost basis in accordance
with subparagraph (B) of this paragraph.
``(B) Determinations.--To determine the amount that shall
be paid under subsection (a)(3) per outstanding loan
guaranteed by a guaranty agency for fiscal year 2008 and
succeeding fiscal years, the Secretary shall--
``(i) establish the per-loan cost basis amount by--
``(I) dividing the total amount of account maintenance fees
paid under subsection (a)(3) in fiscal year 2006, by
``(II) the number of loans under part B that were
outstanding in that fiscal year; and
``(ii) determine on October 1 of fiscal year 2008 and each
subsequent fiscal year, and pay to each guaranty agency, an
amount equal to the product of the number of loans under part
B that are outstanding on October 1 of that fiscal year and
insured by that guaranty agency multiplied by--
``(I) the amount determined under clause (i); increased by
``(II) a percentage equal to the percentage increase in the
GDP price index (as determined by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics of the Department of Labor) between the calendar
quarter ending on June 30, 2006, and the calendar quarter
ending on the June 30 preceding such October 1 of such fiscal
year.''.
SEC. 118. INCREASED LOAN FEES FROM LENDERS.
Paragraph (2) of section 438(d) (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(d)(2)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(2) Amount of loan fees.--
``(A) Amount.--The amount of the loan fee which shall be
deducted under paragraph (1), but which may not be collected
from the borrower, shall be equal to--
``(i) except as provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), 0.50
percent of the principal amount of the loan with respect to
any loan under this part for which the first disbursement was
made on or after October 1, 1993;
``(ii) 1.0 percent of the principal amount of the loan with
respect to any loan under this part for which the first
disbursement was made on or after October 1, 2007, that is
held by any holder other than a holder designated by the
Secretary as a small lender under subparagraph (B); and
``(iii) 0.0 percent of the principal amount of the loan
with respect to any loan under this part for which the first
disbursement was made on or after October 1, 2007, that is
held by any holder that, together with its affiliated
holders, is designated by the Secretary as a small lender
under subparagraph (B).
``(B) Designation of small lenders.--In determining which
holders of eligible loans qualify as small lenders for
purposes of subparagraph (A)(iii), the Secretary shall, using
the most recently available data with respect to the total
principal amount of eligible loans held by holders--
``(i) rank all holders (combined with their affiliated
holders) of eligible loans in descending order by total
principal amount of eligible loans held;
``(ii) calculate the total principal amount of eligible
loans held by all holders; and
``(iii) identify the subset of consecutively ranked holders
under clause (i), starting with the lowest ranked holder,
that together hold a total principal amount of such loans
equal to 15 percent of the total amount calculated under
clause (ii), but excluding the holder, if any, whose holdings
when added cause the total holdings of the subset to equal
but not exceed such 15 percent of such total amount
calculated; and
``(iv) designate as small lenders any holder identified as
a member of the subset under clause (iii).''.
SEC. 119. STUDENT LOAN INFORMATION.
Section 428(k) (20 U.S.C. 1078(k)) is amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Student loan information.--
``(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law or
regulation, a lender, secondary market, holder, or guaranty
agency shall provide, free of charge and in a timely and
effective manner, any student loan information maintained by
that entity that is requested by an institution of higher
education and any third-party servicer (as defined in section
481(c)) working on behalf of that institution to prevent
student loan defaults.
``(B) An institution and any third-party servicer obtaining
access to information under subparagraph (A) shall safeguard
that information in order to prevent potential abuses of that
information, including identity theft.
``(C) Any third party servicer that obtains information
under this subparagraph shall only use the information in a
manner directly related to the default prevention work the
servicer is performing on behalf of the institution of higher
education.
``(D) Any third party servicer that obtains information
under this subparagraph shall be subject to any regulations
established by the Secretary pursuant to section 432
concerning the misuse of such information, including any
penalties for such misuse.''.
PART C--REWARDING SERVICE IN REPAYMENT
SEC. 141. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR SERVICE IN AREAS OF NATIONAL
NEED.
Section 428K (20 U.S.C. 1078-11) is amended to read as
follows:
``SEC. 428K. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR SERVICE IN AREAS OF
NATIONAL NEED.
``(a) Program Authorized.--
``(1) Loan forgiveness authorized.--The Secretary shall
forgive, in accordance with this section, the student loan
obligation of a borrower in the amount specified in
subsection (c), for any new borrower after the date of
enactment of the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007, who--
``(A) has been employed full-time for at least 5
consecutive complete school, academic, or calendar years, as
appropriate, in an area of national need described in
subsection (b); and
``(B) is not in default on a loan for which the borrower
seeks forgiveness.
``(2) Method of loan forgiveness.--To provide loan
forgiveness under paragraph (1), the Secretary is authorized
to carry out a program--
``(A) through the holder of the loan, to assume the
obligation to repay a qualified loan amount for a loan made,
insured, or guaranteed under this part; and
``(B) to cancel a qualified loan amount for a loan made
under part D of this title.
``(3) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
[[Page H7510]]
``(b) Areas of National Need.--For purposes of this
section, an individual shall be treated as employed in an
area of national need if the individual is employed full time
as any of the following:
``(1) Early childhood educators.--An individual who is
employed as an early childhood educator in an eligible
preschool program or eligible early childhood education
program in a low-income community, and who is involved
directly in the care, development, and education of infants,
toddlers, or young children through age 5.
``(2) Nurses.--An individual who is employed--
``(A) as a nurse in a clinical setting; or
``(B) as a member of the nursing faculty at an accredited
school of nursing (as those terms are defined in section 801
of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(3) Foreign language specialists.--An individual who has
obtained a baccalaureate degree in a critical foreign
language and is employed--
``(A) in an elementary or secondary school as a teacher of
a critical foreign language; or
``(B) in an agency of the United States Government in a
position that regularly requires the use of such critical
foreign language.
``(4) Librarians.--An individual who is employed as a
librarian in--
``(A) a public library that serves a geographic area within
which the public schools have a combined average of 30
percent or more of their total student enrollments composed
of children counted under section 1113(a)(5) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; or
``(B) an elementary or secondary school which is in the
school district of a local educational agency which is
eligible in such year for assistance pursuant to title I of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and which
for the purpose of this paragraph and for that year has been
determined by the Secretary (pursuant to regulations and
after consultation with the State educational agency of the
State in which the school is located) to be a school in which
the enrollment of children counted under section 1113(a)(5)
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 exceeds
30 percent of the total enrollment of that school.
``(5) Highly qualified teachers: bilingual education and
low-income communities.--An individual who--
``(A) is highly qualified as such term is defined in
section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965; and
``(B)(i) is employed as a full-time teacher of bilingual
education; or
``(ii) is employed as a teacher for service in a public or
nonprofit private elementary or secondary school which is in
the school district of a local educational agency which is
eligible in such year for assistance pursuant to title I of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and which
for the purpose of this paragraph and for that year has been
determined by the Secretary (pursuant to regulations and
after consultation with the State educational agency of the
State in which the school is located) to be a school in which
the enrollment of children counted under section 1113(a)(5)
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 exceeds
40 percent of the total enrollment of that school.
``(6) Child welfare workers.--An individual who--
``(A) has obtained a degree in social work or a related
field with a focus on serving children and families; and
``(B) is employed in public or private child welfare
services.
``(7) Speech-language pathologists.--An individual who is a
speech-language pathologist, who is employed in an eligible
preschool program or an elementary or secondary school, and
who has, at a minimum, a graduate degree in speech-language
pathology, or communication sciences and disorders.
``(8) National service.--An individual who is engaged as a
participant in project under the National and Community
Service Act of 1990 (as such terms are defined in section 101
of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12511)).
``(9) Public sector employees.--An individual who is
employed in government, public safety (including as a first
responder, firefighter, police officer, or other law
enforcement or public safety officer), emergency management
(including as an emergency medical technician), public
health, or public interest legal services (including
prosecution or public defense).
``(c) Qualified Loan Amount.--The Secretary shall forgive
not more than $5,000 in the aggregate of the student loan
obligation of a borrower that is outstanding after the
completion of the fifth consecutive school, academic, or
calendar year of employment, as appropriate, described in
subsection (a)(1).
``(d) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to authorize the refunding of any repayment of a
loan.
``(e) Segal Americorps Education Award Recipients.--A
student borrower who qualifies for the maximum education
award under subtitle D of title I of the National and
Community Service Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12601 et seq.) shall
not receive under this section more than the difference
between the maximum benefit available under this section and
the maximum award available under such subtitle.
``(f) National Service Award Recipients.--A student
borrower who receives the maximum education award under
subtitle D of title I of the National and Community Service
Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12601 et seq.) shall not receive under
this section more than the difference between the maximum
benefit available under this section and the award received
under such subtitle.
``(g) Ineligibility for Double Benefits.--No borrower may
receive a reduction of loan obligations under both this
section and section 428J or 460.
``(h) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Critical foreign language.--The term `critical
foreign language' includes the languages of Arabic, Korean,
Japanese, Chinese, Pashto, Persian-Farsi, Serbian-Croatian,
Russian, Portuguese, and any other language identified by the
Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Defense
Language Institute, the Foreign Service Institute, and the
National Security Education Program, as a critical foreign
language need.
``(2) Early childhood educator.--The term `early childhood
educator' means an early childhood educator who works
directly with children in an eligible preschool program or
eligible early childhood education program who has completed
a baccalaureate or advanced degree in early childhood
development, early childhood education, or in a field related
to early childhood education.
``(3) Eligible preschool program.--The term `eligible
preschool program' means a program that provides for the
care, development, and education of infants, toddlers, or
young children through age 5, meets any applicable State or
local government licensing, certification, approval, and
registration requirements, and is operated by--
``(A) a public or private school that may be supported,
sponsored, supervised, or administered by a local educational
agency;
``(B) a Head Start agency serving as a grantee designated
under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.);
``(C) a nonprofit or community based organization; or
``(D) a child care program, including a home.
``(4) Eligible early childhood education program.--The term
`eligible early childhood education program' means--
``(A) a family child care program, center-based child care
program, State prekindergarten program, school program, or
other out-of-home early childhood development care program,
that--
``(i) is licensed or regulated by the State; and
``(ii) serves 2 or more unrelated children who are not old
enough to attend kindergarten;
``(B) a Head Start Program carried out under the Head Start
Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.); or
``(C) an Early Head Start Program carried out under section
645A of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9840a).
``(5) Low-income community.--In this subsection, the term
`low-income community' means a community in which 70 percent
of households earn less than 85 percent of the State median
household income.
``(6) Nurse.--The term `nurse' means a nurse who meets all
of the following:
``(A) The nurse graduated from--
``(i) an accredited school of nursing (as those terms are
defined in section 801 of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 296));
``(ii) a nursing center; or
``(iii) an academic health center that provides nurse
training.
``(B) The nurse holds a valid and unrestricted license to
practice nursing in the State in which the nurse practices in
a clinical setting.
``(C) The nurse holds one or more of the following:
``(i) A graduate degree in nursing, or an equivalent
degree.
``(ii) A nursing degree from a collegiate school of nursing
(as defined in section 801 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(iii) A nursing degree from an associate degree school of
nursing (as defined in section 801 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(iv) A nursing degree from a diploma school of nursing
(as defined in section 801 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(7) Speech-language pathologist.--The term `speech-
language pathologist' means a speech-language pathologist who
meets all of the following:
``(A) the speech-language pathologist has received, at a
minimum, a graduate degree in speech-language pathology or
communication sciences and disorders from an institution of
higher education accredited by an agency or association
recognized by the Secretary pursuant to section 496(a) of
this Act; and
``(B) the speech-language pathologist meets or exceeds the
qualifications as defined in section 1861(ll) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x).
``(i) Program Funding.--There shall be available to the
Secretary to carry out this section, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, such sums as may be necessary to provide loan
forgiveness in accordance with this section to each eligible
individual.''.
SEC. 142. INCOME CONTINGENT REPAYMENT FOR PUBLIC SECTOR
EMPLOYEES.
Section 455(e) (20 U.S.C. 1087e(e)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(7) Repayment plan for public sector employees.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall forgive the balance
due on any loan made under this part or section 428C(b)(5)
for a borrower--
[[Page H7511]]
``(i) who has made 120 payments on such loan pursuant to
income contingent repayment; and
``(ii) who is employed, and was employed for the 10-year
period in which the borrower made the 120 payments described
in clause (i), in a public sector job.
``(B) Public sector job.--In this paragraph, the term
`public sector job' means a full-time job in emergency
management, government, public safety, law enforcement,
public health, education (including early childhood
education), social work in a public child or family service
agency, or public interest legal services (including
prosecution or public defense).
``(8) Return to standard repayment.--A borrower who is
repaying a loan made under this part pursuant to income
contingent repayment may choose, at any time, to terminate
repayment pursuant to income contingent repayment and repay
such loan under the standard repayment plan.''.
SEC. 143. INCOME-BASED REPAYMENT.
(a) Amendment.--Part G of title IV (20 U.S.C. 1088 et seq.)
is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 493C. INCOME-BASED REPAYMENT.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Excepted plus loan.--The term `excepted PLUS loan'
means a loan under section 428B, or a Federal Direct PLUS
Loan, that is made, insured, or guaranteed on behalf of a
dependent student.
``(2) Partial financial hardship.--The term `partial
financial hardship' means the amount by which--
``(A) the annual amount due on the total amount of loans
made, insured, or guaranteed under part B or D (other than an
excepted PLUS loan) to a borrower as calculated under the
standard repayment plan under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or
455(d)(1)(A); exceeds
``(B) 15 percent of the result obtained by calculating the
amount by which--
``(i) the borrower's, and the borrower's spouse's (if
applicable), adjusted gross income; exceeds
``(ii) 150 percent of the poverty line applicable to the
borrower's family size as determined under section 673(2) of
the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9902(2)).
``(b) Income-Based Repayment Program Authorized.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the
Secretary shall carry out a program under which--
``(1) a borrower of any loan made, insured, or guaranteed
under part B or D (other than an excepted PLUS loan) who has
a partial financial hardship may elect, during any period the
borrower has the partial financial hardship, to have the
borrower's aggregate monthly payment for all such loans not
exceed the result described in subsection (a)(2)(B) divided
by 12;
``(2) the holder of such a loan shall apply the borrower's
monthly payment under this subsection first toward interest
due on the loan and then toward the principal of the loan;
``(3) any interest due and not paid under paragraph (2)
shall be capitalized;
``(4) any principal due and not paid under paragraph (2)
shall be deferred;
``(5) the amount of time the borrower makes monthly
payments under paragraph (1) may exceed 10 years;
``(6) if the borrower no longer has a partial financial
hardship or no longer wishes to continue the election under
this subsection, then--
``(A) the maximum monthly payment required to be paid for
all loans made to the borrower under part B or D (other than
an excepted PLUS loan) shall not exceed the monthly amount
calculated under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or 455(d)(1)(A) when
the borrower first made the election described in this
subsection; and
``(B) the amount of time the borrower is permitted to repay
such loans may exceed 10 years;
``(7) the Secretary shall repay or cancel any outstanding
balance of principal and interest due on all loans made under
part B or D (other than a loan under section 428B or a
Federal Direct PLUS Loan) to a borrower who--
``(A) is in deferment due to an economic hardship described
in section 435(o) for a period of time prescribed by the
Secretary, not to exceed 20 years; or
``(B)(i) makes the election under this subsection; and
``(ii) for a period of time prescribed by the Secretary,
not to exceed 20 years (including any period during which the
borrower is in deferment due to an economic hardship
described in section 435(o)), meets 1 or more of the
following requirements:
``(I) Has made reduced monthly payments under paragraph
(1).
``(II) Has made monthly payments of not less than the
monthly amount calculated under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or
455(d)(1)(A) when the borrower first made the election
described in this subsection.
``(III) Has made payments under a standard repayment plan
under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or 455(d)(1)(A).
``(IV) Has made payments under an income contingent
repayment plan under section 455(d)(1)(D); and
``(8) a borrower who is repaying a loan made under this
part pursuant to income-based repayment may elect, at any
time, to terminate repayment pursuant to income-based
repayment and repay such loan under the standard repayment
plan.''.
(b) Conforming ICR Amendment.--Section 455(d)(1)(D) (20
U.S.C. 1087e(d)(1)(D)) is amended by inserting ``made on
behalf of a dependent student'' after ``PLUS loan''.
SEC. 144. DEFINITION OF ECONOMIC HARDSHIP.
Section 435(o) (20 U.S.C. 1085(o)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking ``100 percent of
the poverty line for a family of 2'' and inserting ``150
percent of the poverty line applicable to the borrower's
family size'';
(B) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(C) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B);
and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``(1)(C)'' and inserting
``(1)(B)''.
SEC. 145. DEFERRALS.
(a) FISL.--Section 427(a)(2)(C)(iii) (20 U.S.C.
1077(a)(2)(C)(iii)) is amended by striking ``not in excess of
3 years''.
(b) Interest Subsidies.--Section 428(b)(1)(M)(iv) (20
U.S.C. 1078(b)(1)(M)(iv)) is amended by striking ``not in
excess of 3 years''.
(c) Direct Loans.--Section 455(f)(2)(D) (20 U.S.C.
1087e(f)(2)(D)) is amended by striking ``not in excess of 3
years''.
(d) Perkins.--Section 464(c)(2)(A)(iv) (20 U.S.C.
1087dd(c)(2)(A)(iv)) is amended by striking ``not in excess
of 3 years''.
SEC. 146. MAXIMUM REPAYMENT PERIOD.
(a) In General.--Section 455(e) (20 U.S.C. 1087e(e)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(9) Maximum repayment period.--In calculating the
extended period of time for which an income contingent
repayment plan under this subsection may be in effect for a
borrower, the Secretary shall include all time periods during
which a borrower of loans under part B, part D, or part E--
``(A) is not in default on any loan that is included in the
income contingent repayment plan; and
``(B)(i) is in deferment due to an economic hardship
described in section 435(o);
``(ii) makes monthly payments under paragraph (1) or (6) of
section 493C(b); or
``(iii) makes payments under a standard repayment plan
described in section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or subsection
(d)(1)(A).''.
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 455(d)(1)(C) (20 U.S.C.
1087e(d)(1)(C)) is amended by striking ``428(b)(9)(A)(v)''
and inserting ``428(b)(9)(A)(iv)''.
TITLE II--REDUCING THE COST OF COLLEGE
SEC. 201. STATE COMMITMENT TO AFFORDABLE COLLEGE EDUCATION.
Title I is amended by inserting after section 131 (20
U.S.C. 1015) the following new section:
``SEC. 132. STATE COMMITMENT TO AFFORDABLE COLLEGE EDUCATION.
``(a) Maintenance of Effort Required.--No State shall
reduce the total amount provided by the State for public
institutions of higher education in such State for any
academic year beginning on or after July 1, 2008, to an
amount which is less than the average amount provided by such
State to such institutions of higher education during the 5
most recent preceeding academic years for which satisfactory
data is available.
``(b) Withholding of All LEAP Funds for Violations.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of
Education shall withhold from any State that violates
subsection (a) any amount that would otherwise be available
to the State under the Leveraging Educational Assistance
Partnership Program under subpart 4 of part A of title IV
until such State has corrected such violation.''.
SEC. 202. CONSUMER INFORMATION AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY IN
HIGHER EDUCATION.
Section 131 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1015) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 131. CONSUMER INFORMATION AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY IN
HIGHER EDUCATION.
``(a) College Opportunity On-Line (COOL) Website Re-Design
Process.--In carrying out this section, the Commissioner of
Education Statistics--
``(1) shall identify the data elements that are of greatest
importance to prospective students, enrolled students, and
their families, paying particular attention to low-income,
non-traditional student populations, and first-generation
college students;
``(2) shall convene a group of individuals with expertise
in the collection and reporting of data related to
institutions of higher education, the use of consumer data,
and consumer marketing in general to--
``(A) determine the relevance of particular data elements
to prospective students, enrolled students, and families;
``(B) assess the cost-effectiveness of various ways in
which institutions of higher education might produce relevant
data;
``(C) determine the general comparability of the data
across institutions of higher education;
``(D) make recommendations regarding the inclusion of
specific data items and the most effective and least
burdensome methods of collecting and reporting useful data
from institutions of higher education; and
``(3) shall ensure that the redesigned COOL website--
``(A) uses, to the extent practicable, data elements
currently provided by institutions of higher education to the
Secretary;
[[Page H7512]]
``(B) includes clear and uniform information determined to
be relevant to prospective students, enrolled students, and
families;
``(C) provides comparable information, by ensuring that
data are based on accepted criteria and common definitions;
``(D) includes a sorting function that permits users to
customize their search for and comparison of institutions of
higher education based on the information identified through
the process as prescribed in paragraph (1) as being of
greatest relevance to choosing an institution of higher
education.
``(b) Data Collection.--
``(1) Data system.--The Commissioner of Education
Statistics shall continue to redesign the relevant parts of
the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System to include
additional data as required by this section and to continue
to improve the usefulness and timeliness of data collected by
such systems in order to inform consumers about institutions
of higher education.
``(2) College consumer profile.--The Secretary shall
continue to publish on the COOL website, for each academic
year and in accordance with standard definitions developed by
the Commissioner of Education Statistics (including
definitions developed under section 131(a)(3)(A) as in effect
on the day before the date of enactment of the College Cost
Reduction Act of 2007), from at least all institutions of
higher education participating in programs under title IV the
following information:
``(A) The tuition and fees charged for a first-time, full-
time, full-year undergraduate student.
``(B) The room and board charges for a first-time, full-
time, full-year undergraduate student.
``(C) The price of attendance for a first-time, full-time,
full-year undergraduate student, consistent with the
provisions of section 472.
``(D) The average amount of financial assistance received
by a first-year, full-time, full-year undergraduate student,
including--
``(i) each type of assistance or benefits described in
428(a)(2)(C)(ii);
``(ii) institutional and other assistance; and
``(iii) Federal loans under parts B, D, and E of title IV.
``(E) The number of first-time, full-time, full-year
undergraduate students receiving financial assistance
described in each clause of subparagraph (D).
``(F) The institutional instructional expenditure per full-
time equivalent student.
``(G) Student enrollment information, including information
on the number and percentage of full-time and part-time
students, the number and percentage of resident and non-
resident students.
``(H) Faculty-to-student ratios.
``(I) Faculty information, including the total number of
faculty and the percentage of faculty who are full-time
employees of the institution and the percentage who are part-
time.
``(J) Completion and graduation rates of undergraduate
students, identifying whether the completion or graduation
rates are from a 2-year or 4-year program of instruction and,
in the case of a 2-year program of instruction, the
percentage of students who transfer to 4-year institutions
prior or subsequent to completion or graduation.
``(K) A link to the institution of higher education with
information of interest to students including mission,
accreditation, student services (including services for
students with disabilities), transfer of credit policies, any
articulation agreements entered into by the institution, and,
if appropriate, placement rates and other measures of success
in preparing students for entry into or advancement in the
workforce.
``(L) The college affordability information elements
specified in subsection (c).
``(M) Any additional information that the Secretary may
require.
``(c) College Affordability Information Elements.--The
college affordability information elements required by
subsection (b)(2)(L) shall include, for each institution
submitting data--
``(1) the sticker price of the institution for the 3 most
recent academic years;
``(2) the net tuition price of the institution for the 3
most recent academic years;
``(3) the percentage change in both the sticker price and
the net tuition price over the 3-year time period that is
being reported;
``(4) the percentage change in the CPI over the same 3-year
time period; and
``(5) whether the institution has been placed on
affordability alert status as required by subsection (d)(3).
``(d) Outcomes and Actions.--
``(1) Response from institution.--Effective on June 30,
2008, an institution that increases its sticker price at a
percentage rate for any 3-year interval ending on or after
that date that exceeds two times the rate of change in the
CPI over the same time period shall provide a report to the
Secretary, in such a form, at such time, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require. Such report shall
be published by the Secretary on the COOL website, and shall
include--
``(A) a description of the factors contributing to the
increase in the institution's costs and in the tuition and
fees charged to students; and
``(B) if determinations of tuition and fee increases are
not within the exclusive control of the institution, a
description of the agency or instrumentality of State
government or other entity that participates in such
determinations and the authority exercised by such agency,
instrumentality, or entity.
``(2) Quality-efficiency task forces.--
``(A) Required.--Each institution subject to paragraph (1)
that has a percentage change in its sticker price that is in
the highest 5 percent of all institutions subject to
paragraph (1) shall establish a quality-efficiency task force
to review the operations of such institution.
``(B) Membership.--Such task force shall include
administrators, business and civic leaders, and faculty, and
may include students, trustees, parents of students, and
alumni of such institution.
``(C) Functions.--Such task force shall analyze
institutional operating costs in comparison with such costs
at other institutions within the class of institutions. Such
analysis should identify areas where, in comparison with
other institutions in such class, the institution operates
more expensively to produce a similar result. Any identified
areas should then be targeted for in-depth analysis for cost
reduction opportunities.
``(D) Report.--Not later than one year after a quality-
efficiency task force is established pursuant to subparagraph
(A), the results of the analysis by a such task force shall
be submitted to the Secretary and shall be made available to
the public on the COOL website.
``(3) Consequences for 2-year continuation of failure.--If
the Secretary determines that an institution that is subject
to paragraph (1)) has failed to reduce the subsequent
increase in sticker price to equal to or below two times the
rate of change in the CPI for 2 consecutive academic years
subsequent to the 3-year interval used under paragraph (1),
the Secretary shall place the institution on affordability
alert status.
``(4) Exemptions.--Notwithstanding paragraph (3), an
institution shall not be placed on affordability alert status
if, for any 3-year interval for which sticker prices are
computed under paragraph (1)--
``(A) with respect to the class of institutions described
in paragraph (6) to which the institution belongs, the
sticker price of the institution is in the lowest quartile of
institutions within such class, as determined by the
Secretary, during the last year of such 3-year interval; or
``(B) the institution has a percentage change in its
sticker price computed under paragraph (1) that exceeds two
times the rate of change in the CPI over the same time
period, but the dollar amount of the sticker price increase
is less than $500.
``(5) Information to state agencies.--Any institution that
reports under paragraph (1)(B) that an agency or
instrumentality of State government or other entity
participates in the determinations of tuition and fee
increases shall, prior to submitting any information to the
Secretary under this subsection, submit such information to,
and request the comments and input of, such agency,
instrumentality, or entity. With respect to any such
institution, the Secretary shall provide a copy of any
communication by the Secretary with that institution to such
agency, instrumentality, or entity.
``(6) Classes of institutions.--For purposes of this
subsection, the classes of institutions shall be those
sectors used by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System, based on whether the institution is public, nonprofit
private, or for-profit private, and whether the institution
has a 4-year, 2-year, or less than 2-year program of
instruction.
``(7) Data rejection.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed as allowing the Secretary to reject the data
submitted by an individual institution of higher education.
``(e) Information to the Public.--The Secretary shall work
with public and private entities to promote broad public
awareness, particularly among middle and high school students
and their families, of the information made available under
this section, including by distribution to students who
participate in or receive benefits from means-tested
federally funded education programs and other Federal
programs determined by the Secretary.
``(f) Fines.--In addition to actions authorized in section
487(c), the Secretary may impose a fine in an amount not to
exceed $25,000 on an institution of higher education for
failing to provide the information required by this section
in a timely and accurate manner, or for failing to otherwise
cooperate with the National Center for Education Statistics
regarding efforts to obtain data under subsections (c) and
(i) and pursuant to the program participation agreement
entered into under section 487.
``(g) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
``(h) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
``(1) Net tuition price.--The term `net tuition price'
means the average tuition and fees charged to a first-time,
full-time, full-year undergraduate student, minus the average
grants provided to such students, for any academic year.
``(2) Sticker price.--The term `sticker price' means the
average tuition and fees charged to a first-time, full-time,
full-year undergraduate student by an institution of higher
education for any academic year.
``(3) CPI.--The term `CPI' means the Consumer Price Index-
All Urban Consumers (Current Series).''.
[[Page H7513]]
SEC. 203. INCENTIVES AND REWARDS FOR LOW TUITION.
Subpart 1 of part A of title IV is amended by inserting
after section 401A (20 U.S.C. 1070a-1) the following new
section:
``SEC. 401B. INCENTIVES AND REWARDS FOR LOW TUITION.
``(a) Rewards for Low Tuition.--For any institution of
higher education that, for academic year 2008-2009 or any
succeeding academic year, such institution's annual net
tuition price increase (expressed as a percentage) for the
most recent academic year for which satisfactory data is
available is equal to or less than the percentage change in
the higher education price index for such academic year, the
Secretary shall, notwithstanding any other provision of the
law, provide such institution an amount sufficient to provide
a 25 percent increase under subpart 1 of part A of title IV
to each Pell Grant recipient attending such institution for
the next award year beginning after the date of such
determination. Each such institution shall distribute any
amounts received under this subsection among such Pell Grant
recipients by increasing the amount of their Pell Grant
awards by 25 percent.
``(b) Rewards for Guaranteed Tuition.--
``(1) Bonus.--For each institution of higher education that
the Secretary of Education determines complies with the
requirements of paragraph (2) or paragraph (3) of this
subsection, the Secretary shall, notwithstanding any other
provision of the law, provide such institution an amount
sufficient to provide a 10 percent increase under subpart 1
of part A of title IV to each Pell Grant recipient attending
such institution for the next award year beginning after the
date of such determination. Each such institution shall
distribute any amounts received under this subsection among
such Pell Grant recipients by increasing the amount of their
Pell Grant awards by 10 percent.
``(2) 4-year institutions.--An institution of higher
education that provides a program of instruction for which it
awards a bachelor's degree complies with the requirements of
this paragraph if such institution guarantees that for any
academic year beginning on or after July 1, 2008, and for
each of the 4 succeeding continuous academic years, the net
tuition price charged to an undergraduate student will not
exceed--
``(A) the amount that the student was charged for an
academic year at the time he or she first enrolled in the
institution of higher education, plus
``(B) the product of the percentage increase in the higher
education price index for the prior academic year, or the
most recent prior academic year for which data is available,
multiplied by the amount determined under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Less-than 4-year institutions.--An institution of
higher education that does not provide a program of
instruction for which it awards a bachelor's degree complies
with the requirements of this paragraph if such institution
guarantees that for any academic year (or the equivalent)
beginning on or after July 1, 2008, and for each of the 1.5
succeeding continuous academic years, the net tuition price
charged to an undergraduate student will not exceed--
``(A) the amount that the student was charged for an
academic year at the time he or she first enrolled in the
institution of higher education, plus
``(B) the product of the percentage increase in the higher
education price index for the prior academic year, or the
most recent prior academic year for which data is available,
multiplied by the amount determined under subparagraph (A).
``(c) Maintaining Affordable Tuition.--For any institution
of higher education whose increase in the annual net tuition
price (expressed as a percentage), for the most recent
academic year for which satisfactory data is available, is
greater than the percentage increase in the higher education
price index for such academic year, the Secretary shall
require such institution to submit to the Secretary the
following information, within 6 months of such determination:
``(1) a detailed report on the exact causes for the net
tuition price increase that outlines revenues and
expenditures; and
``(2) cost containment strategies to lower net tuition
prices.
``(d) Definitions.--
``(1) Net tuition price.--The term `net tuition price' has
the same meaning as provided in section 131(k).
``(2) Higher education price index.--The term `higher
education price index' means a statistical measure of change
over time in the prices of a fixed market basket of goods and
services purchased by colleges and universities through
current fund educational and general expenditures (excluding
expenditures for research), as developed by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics.
``(e) Funding.--There shall be available to the Secretary
to carry out this section, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, $15,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008
through 2012.
``(f) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section
shall expire at the end of fiscal year 2012.''.
SEC. 204. COOPERATIVE EDUCATION REWARDS FOR INSTITUTIONS THAT
RESTRAIN TUITION INCREASES.
The Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.)
is amended by adding at the end the following title:
``TITLE VIII--COOPERATIVE EDUCATION REWARDS FOR INSTITUTIONS THAT
RESTRAIN TUITION INCREASES
``SEC. 801. ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS.
``(a) Eligible Institutions.--An institution of higher
education shall be eligible to apply for a grant under this
title if such institution, and a combination of such
institutions shall be eligible to apply for such a grant if
each institution in such combination--
``(1) for the academic year for which the institution is
applying, keeps such institution's annual net tuition price
increase (expressed as a percentage) for the most recent
academic year for which satisfactory data is available equal
to or less than the percentage change in the higher education
price index for such year; and
``(2) for such academic year, provides the guarantee
required by paragraph (2) or (3) of section 401A(b).
``(b) Definitions.--
``(1) Cooperative education.--For the purpose of this title
the term `cooperative education' means the provision of
alternating or parallel periods of academic study and public
or private employment in order to give students work
experiences related to their academic or occupational
objectives and an opportunity to earn the funds necessary for
continuing and completing their education.
``(2) Calculation of index.--The net tuition price index
shall be equal to the percentage increase in the net tuition
price charged for a first-time, full-time, full-year
undergraduate student between a preceding academic year and
the most recent academic year for which satisfactory data are
available.
``(3) Net tuition price.--The term `net tuition price'
means the average tuition and fees charged to first-time,
full-year, full-time undergraduate students, minus the
average grants provided to such students, for any academic
year.
``(4) Tuition.--The term `tuition' means the average price
of or payment for actual instruction of first-time, full-
year, full-time undergraduate students at an institution of
higher education, for any academic year.
``SEC. 802. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS; RESERVATIONS.
``(a) Appropriations.--There shall be available to the
Secretary to carry out this title from funds not otherwise
appropriated $15,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008
through 2012.
``(b) Reservations.--Of the amount appropriated for each
such fiscal year--
``(1) not less than 50 percent shall be available for
carrying out grants to institutions of higher education and
combinations of such institutions described in section
803(a)(1)(A) for cooperative education under section 803;
``(2) not less than 25 percent shall be available for
carrying out grants to institutions of higher education
described in section 803(a)(1)(B) for cooperative education
under section 803;
``(3) not to exceed 11 percent shall be available for
demonstration projects under paragraph (1) of section 804(a);
``(4) not to exceed 11 percent shall be available for
training and resource centers under paragraph (2) of section
804(a); and
``(5) not to exceed 3 percent shall be available for
research under paragraph (3) of section 804(a).
``(c) Availability of Appropriations.--Appropriations under
this title shall not be available for the payment of
compensation of students for employment by employers under
arrangements pursuant to this title.
``(d) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this title shall
expire at the end of fiscal year 2012.
``SEC. 803. GRANTS FOR COOPERATIVE EDUCATION.
``(a) Grants Authorized.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized--
``(A) from the amount available under section 802(b)(1) in
each fiscal year and in accordance with the provisions of
this title, to make grants to institutions of higher
education or combinations of such institutions that have not
received a grant under this paragraph in the 10-year period
preceding the date for which a grant under this section is
requested to pay the Federal share of the cost of planning,
establishing, expanding, or carrying out programs of
cooperative education by such institutions or combinations of
institutions; and
``(B) from the amount available under section 802(b)(2) in
each fiscal year and in accordance with the provisions of
this title, to make grants to institutions of higher
education that are operating an existing cooperative
education program as determined by the Secretary to pay the
cost of planning, establishing, expanding, or carrying out
programs of cooperative education by such institutions.
``(2) Program requirement.--Cooperative education programs
assisted under this section shall provide alternating or
parallel periods of academic study and of public or private
employment, giving students work experience related to their
academic or occupational objectives and the opportunity to
earn the funds necessary for continuing and completing their
education.
``(3) Amount of grants.--
``(A) The amount of each grant awarded pursuant to
paragraph (1)(A) to any institution of higher education or
combination of such institutions in any fiscal year shall not
exceed $500,000.
``(B)(i) Except as provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), the
Secretary shall award grants in each fiscal year to each
institution of higher education described in paragraph (1)(B)
that
[[Page H7514]]
has an application approved under subsection (b) in an amount
which bears the same ratio to the amount reserved pursuant to
section 802(b)(2) for such fiscal year as the number of
unduplicated students placed in cooperative education jobs
during the preceding fiscal year (other than cooperative
education jobs under section 804 and as determined by the
Secretary) by such institution of higher education bears to
the total number of all such students placed in such jobs
during the preceding fiscal year by all such institutions.
``(ii) No institution of higher education shall receive a
grant pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) in any fiscal year in an
amount which exceeds 25 percent of such institution's
cooperative education program's personnel and operating
budget for the preceding fiscal year.
``(iii) The minimum annual grant amount which an
institution of higher education is eligible to receive under
paragraph (1)(B) is $1,000 and the maximum annual grant
amount is $75,000.
``(4) Limitation.--The Secretary shall not award grants
pursuant to paragraphs (1)(A) and (1)(B) to the same
institution of higher education or combination of such
institution in any one fiscal year.
``(5) Uses.--Grants under paragraph (1)(B) shall be used
exclusively--
``(A) to expand the quality and participation of a
cooperative education program;
``(B) for outreach in new curricular areas; and
``(C) for outreach to potential participants including
underrepresented and nontraditional populations.
``(b) Applications.--Each institution of higher education
or combination of such institutions desiring to receive a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time and in such manner as the Secretary
shall prescribe. Each such application shall--
``(1) set forth the program or activities for which a grant
is authorized under this section;
``(2) specify each portion of such program or activities
which will be performed by a nonprofit organization or
institution other than the applicant and the compensation to
be paid for such performance;
``(3) provide that the applicant will expend during such
fiscal year for the purpose of such program or activities not
less than the amount expended for such purpose during the
previous fiscal year;
``(4) describe the plans which the applicant will carry out
to assure, and contain a formal statement of the
institution's commitment which assures, that the applicant
will continue the cooperative education program beyond the 5-
year period of Federal assistance described in subsection
(c)(1) at a level which is not less than the total amount
expended for such program during the first year such program
was assisted under this section;
``(5) provide that, in the case of an institution of higher
education that provides a 2-year program which is acceptable
for full credit toward a bachelor's degree, the cooperative
education program will be available to students who are
certificate or associate degree candidates and who carry at
least one-half the normal full-time academic workload;
``(6) provide that the applicant will--
``(A) for each fiscal year for which the applicant receives
a grant, make such reports with respect to the impact of the
cooperative education program in the previous fiscal year as
may be essential to ensure that the applicant is complying
with the provisions of this section, including--
``(i) the number of unduplicated student applicants in the
cooperative education program;
``(ii) the number of unduplicated students placed in
cooperative education jobs;
``(iii) the number of employers who have hired cooperative
education students;
``(iv) the average income for students derived from working
in cooperative education jobs; and
``(v) the increase or decrease in the number of
unduplicated students placed in cooperative education jobs in
each fiscal year compared to the previous fiscal year; and
``(B) keep such records as are essential to ensure that the
applicant is complying with the provisions of this title,
including the notation of cooperative education employment on
the student's transcript;
``(7) describe the extent to which programs in the academic
discipline for which the application is made have had a
favorable reception by public and private sector employers;
``(8) describe the extent to which the institution is
committed to extending cooperative education on an
institution-wide basis for all students who can benefit;
``(9) describe the plans that the applicant will carry out
to evaluate the applicant's cooperative education program at
the end of the grant period;
``(10) provide for such fiscal control and fund accounting
procedures as may be necessary to assure proper disbursement
of, and accounting for, Federal funds paid to the applicant
under this title;
``(11) demonstrate a commitment to serving all underserved
populations; and
``(12) include such other information as is essential to
carry out the provisions of this title.
``(c) Duration of Grants; Federal Share.--
``(1) Duration of grants.--No individual institution of
higher education may receive, individually or as a
participant in a combination of such institutions--
``(A) a grant pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(A) for more
than 5 fiscal years; or
``(B) a grant pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(B) for more
than 5 fiscal years.
``(2) Federal share.--The Federal share of a grant under
section 803(a)(1)(A) may not exceed--
``(A) 85 percent of the cost of carrying out the program or
activities described in the application in the first year the
applicant receives a grant under this section;
``(B) 70 percent of such cost in the second such year;
``(C) 55 percent of such cost in the third such year;
``(D) 40 percent of such cost in the fourth such year; and
``(E) 25 percent of such cost in the fifth such year.
``(3) Special rule.--Any provision of law to the contrary
notwithstanding, the Secretary shall not waive the provisions
of this subsection.
``(d) Maintenance of Effort.--If the Secretary determines
that a recipient of funds under this section has failed to
maintain the fiscal effort described in subsection (b)(3),
then the Secretary may elect not to make grant payments under
this section to such recipient.
``SEC. 804. DEMONSTRATION AND INNOVATION PROJECTS; TRAINING
AND RESOURCE CENTERS; AND RESEARCH.
``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary is authorized, in
accordance with the provisions of this section, to make
grants and enter into contracts for--
``(1) the conduct of demonstration projects designed to
demonstrate or determine the feasibility or value of
innovative methods of cooperative education from the amounts
available in each fiscal year under section 802(b)(3);
``(2) the conduct of training and resource centers designed
to--
``(A) train personnel in the field of cooperative
education;
``(B) improve materials used in cooperative education
programs if such improvement is conducted in conjunction with
other activities described in this paragraph;
``(C) furnish technical assistance to institutions of
higher education to increase the potential of the institution
to continue to conduct a cooperative education program
without Federal assistance;
``(D) encourage model cooperative education programs which
furnish education and training in occupations in which there
is a national need;
``(E) support partnerships under which an institution
carrying out a comprehensive cooperative education program
joins with one or more institutions of higher education in
order to (i) assist the institutions other than the
comprehensive cooperative education institution to develop
and expand an existing program of cooperative education, or
(ii) establish and improve or expand comprehensive
cooperative education programs; and
``(F) encourage model cooperative education programs in the
fields of science and mathematics for women and minorities
who are underrepresented in such fields
from the amounts available in each fiscal year under section
802(b)(4); and
``(3) the conduct of research relating to cooperative
education, from the amounts available in each fiscal year
under section 802(b)(5).
``(b) Administrative Provision.--
``(1) In general.--To carry out this section, the Secretary
may--
``(A) make grants to or contracts with institutions of
higher education, or combinations of such institutions; and
``(B) make grants to or contracts with other public or
private nonprofit agencies or organizations, whenever such
grants or contracts will make an especially significant
contribution to attaining the objectives of this section.
``(2) Limitation.--
``(A) The Secretary may not use more than 3 percent of the
amount appropriated to carry out this section in each fiscal
year to enter into contracts described in paragraph (1)(A).
``(B) The Secretary may use not more than 3 percent of the
amount appropriated to carry out this section in each fiscal
year to enter into contracts described in paragraph (1)(B).
``(c) Supplement Not Supplant.--A recipient of a grant or
contract under this section may use the funds provided only
so as to supplement and, to the extent possible, increase the
level of funds that would, in the absence of such funds, be
made available from non-Federal sources to carry out the
activities supported by such grant or contract, and in no
case to supplant such funds from non-Federal sources.''.
TITLE III--ENSURING A HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHER IN EVERY CLASSROOM
PART A--TEACH GRANTS
SEC. 301. TEACH GRANTS.
Part A of title IV (20 U.S.C. 1070a et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subpart:
``Subpart 9--TEACH Grants
``SEC. 420L. PROGRAM ESTABLISHED.
``(a) Program Authority.--
``(1) Payments required.--The Secretary shall pay to each
eligible institution such sums as may be necessary to pay to
each eligible student (defined in accordance with
[[Page H7515]]
section 484) who files an application and agreement in
accordance with section 420M, and who qualifies--
``(A) under paragraph (2) of section 420M(a), a TEACH Grant
in the amount of $4,000 for each academic year during which
that student is in attendance at the institution; and
``(B) under paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 420M(a), a
Bonus TEACH Grant in the amount of $500 (in addition to the
amount of the TEACH Grant under subparagraph (A)) for each
academic year during which that student so qualifies.
``(2) Reference.--Grants made under--
``(A) paragraph (1)(A) shall be known as `Teacher Education
Assistance for College and Higher Education Grants' or `TEACH
Grants'; and
``(B) paragraph (1)(B) shall be known as Bonus TEACH
Grants.
``(b) Payment Methodology.--
``(1) Prepayment.--Not less than 85 percent of any funds
provided to an institution under subsection (a) shall be
advanced to eligible institutions prior to the start of each
payment period and shall be based upon an amount requested by
the institution as needed to pay eligible students until such
time as the Secretary determines and publishes in the Federal
Register with an opportunity for comment, an alternative
payment system that provides payments to institutions in an
accurate and timely manner, except that this sentence shall
not be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary to
place an institution on a reimbursement system of payment.
``(2) Direct payment.--Nothing in this section shall be
interpreted to prohibit the Secretary from paying directly to
students, in advance of the beginning of the academic term,
an amount for which they are eligible, in cases where the
eligible institution elects not to participate in the
disbursement system required by paragraph (1).
``(3) Distribution of grants to students.--Payments under
this subpart shall be made, in accordance with regulations
promulgated by the Secretary for such purpose, in such manner
as will best accomplish the purposes of this subpart. Any
disbursement allowed to be made by crediting the student's
account shall be limited to tuition and fees and, in the case
of institutionally-owned housing, room and board. The student
may elect to have the institution provide other such goods
and services by crediting the student's account.
``(c) Reductions in Amount.--
``(1) Part-time students.--In any case where a student
attends an institution of higher education on less than a
full-time basis (including a student who attends an
institution of higher education on less than a half-time
basis) during any academic year, the amount of a grant under
this subpart for which that student is eligible shall be
reduced in proportion to the degree to which that student is
not attending on a full-time basis, in accordance with a
schedule of reductions established by the Secretary for the
purposes of this subpart, computed in accordance with this
subpart. Such schedule of reductions shall be established by
regulation and published in the Federal Register in
accordance with section 482 of this Act.
``(2) No exceeding cost.--The amount of a grant awarded
under this subpart, in combination with Federal assistance
and other student assistance, shall not exceed the cost of
attendance (as defined in section 472) at the institution at
which that student is in attendance. If, with respect to any
student, it is determined that the amount of a TEACH Grant or
a Bonus TEACH Grant exceeds the cost of attendance for that
year, the amount of the TEACH Grant or Bonus TEACH Grant,
respectively, shall be reduced until such grant does not
exceed the cost of attendance at such institution.
``(d) Period of Eligibility for Grants.--
``(1) Undergraduate students.--The period during which an
undergraduate student may receive grants under this subpart
shall be the period required for the completion of the first
undergraduate baccalaureate course of study being pursued by
that student at the institution at which the student is in
attendance except that--
``(A) any period during which the student is enrolled in a
noncredit or remedial course of study as defined in paragraph
(3) shall not be counted for the purpose of this paragraph;
and
``(B) the total amount that a student may receive under
this subpart for undergraduate study shall not exceed $16,000
with respect to a student who receives only TEACH Grants, and
$18,000 with respect to a student who receives TEACH Grants
and Bonus TEACH Grants.
``(2) Graduate students.--The period during which a
graduate student may receive grants under this subpart shall
be the period required for the completion of a master's
degree course of study being pursued by that student at the
institution at which the student is in attendance, except
that the total amount that a student may receive under this
subpart for graduate study shall not exceed $8,000 with
respect to a student who receives only TEACH Grants, and
$10,000 with respect to a student who receives TEACH Grants
and Bonus TEACH Grants.
``(3) Remedial course; study abroad.--Nothing in this
section shall exclude from eligibility courses of study which
are noncredit or remedial in nature (including courses in
English language acquisition) which are determined by the
institution to be necessary to help the student be prepared
for the pursuit of a first undergraduate baccalaureate degree
or certificate or, in the case of courses in English language
instruction, to be necessary to enable the student to utilize
already existing knowledge, training, or skills. Nothing in
this section shall exclude from eligibility programs of study
abroad that are approved for credit by the home institution
at which the student is enrolled.
``SEC. 420M. ELIGIBILITY; APPLICATIONS; SELECTION.
``(a) Applications; Demonstration of Eligibility.--
``(1) Filing required.--The Secretary shall from time to
time set dates by which students shall file applications for
grants under this subpart. Each student desiring a grant
under this subpart for any year shall file an application
containing such information and assurances as the Secretary
may deem necessary to enable the Secretary to carry out the
functions and responsibilities of this subpart.
``(2) Demonstration of teach grant eligibility.--Each
application submitted under paragraph (1) for a TEACH Grant
shall contain such information as is necessary to demonstrate
that--
``(A) if the applicant is an enrolled student--
``(i) the student is an eligible student for purposes of
section 484;
``(ii) the student--
``(I) has a grade point average that is determined, under
standards prescribed by the Secretary, to be comparable to a
3.25 average on a zero to 4.0 scale, except that, if the
student is in the first year of a program of undergraduate
education, such grade point average shall be determined on
the basis of the student's cumulative high school grade point
average; or
``(II) displayed high academic aptitude by receiving a
score above the 75th percentile on at least one of the
batteries in an undergraduate or graduate school admissions
test; and
``(iii) the student is completing coursework and other
requirements necessary to begin a career in teaching, or
plans to complete such coursework and requirements prior to
graduating; or
``(B) if the applicant is a current or prospective teacher
applying for a grant to obtain a graduate degree--
``(i) the applicant is a teacher or a retiree from another
occupation with expertise in a field in which there is a
shortage of teachers, such as math, science, special
education, English language acquisition, or another high-need
subject; or
``(ii) the applicant is or was a teacher who is using high-
quality alternative certification routes, such as Teach for
America, to get certified.
``(3) Demonstration of bonus teach grant eligibility.--Each
application submitted under paragraph (1) for a Bonus TEACH
Grant shall contain such information as is necessary to
demonstrate that--
``(A) the applicant is eligible for, and has applied for, a
TEACH Grant; and
``(B) the applicant is--
``(i) a student pursuing an undergraduate degree in
mathematics, science, or a science-related field; and
``(ii) a student enrolled in a qualified teacher
preparation program, as defined in section 420N.
``(b) Agreements To Serve.--Each application under
subsection (a) shall contain or be accompanied by an
agreement by the applicant that--
``(1) the applicant will--
``(A) serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less
than 4 academic years within 8 years after completing the
course of study for which the applicant received a TEACH
Grant under this subpart;
``(B) teach in a school described in section 465(a)(2)(A);
``(C) with respect to an applicant for--
``(i) TEACH Grants, teach in any of the following fields:
mathematics, science, a foreign language, bilingual
education, or special education, or as a reading specialist,
or another field documented as high-need by the Federal
Government, State government, or local education agency and
approved by the Secretary; or
``(ii) TEACH Grants and Bonus TEACH Grants, teach
mathematics, science, or a science-related field;
``(D) submit evidence of such employment in the form of a
certification by the chief administrative officer of the
school upon completion of each year of such service; and
``(E) comply with the requirements for being a highly
qualified teacher as defined in section 9101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
``(2) in the event that the applicant is determined to have
failed or refused to carry out such service obligation, the
sum of the amounts of any TEACH Grants and Bonus TEACH Grants
received by such applicant will be treated as a loan and
collected from the applicant in accordance with subsection
(c) and the regulations thereunder.
``(c) Repayment for Failure To Complete Service.--In the
event that any recipient of a grant under this subpart fails
or refuses to comply with the service obligation in the
agreement under subsection (b), the sum of the amounts of any
TEACH Grants and Bonus TEACH Grants received by such
recipient shall be treated as a Direct Loan under part D of
title IV, and shall be subject to repayment, together with
interest thereon accruing after the period of service, in
accordance with terms and conditions specified
[[Page H7516]]
by the Secretary in regulations under this subpart.
``SEC. 420N. DEFINITIONS.
``For the purposes of this subpart:
``(1) Eligible institution.--The term `eligible
institution' means an institution of higher education as
defined in section 102, except that such term does not
include an institution described in subsection (a)(1)(A) of
that section.
``(2) Qualified teacher preparation program.--The term
`qualified teacher preparation program' means a program for
students described in subsection (a)(2)(A) of section 420M or
teachers described in subsection (a)(2)(B) of such section
(referred to jointly in this paragraph as `teacher
candidates') that--
``(A) recruits and prepares teacher candidates who major in
science, technology fields, engineering, or mathematics
disciplines to become certified as elementary and secondary
teachers in those disciplines, with the goals of improving
teacher knowledge and effectiveness and increasing elementary
and secondary student academic achievement;
``(B) is implemented by an institution of higher education
in partnership with high-need local educational agencies;
``(C) offers a baccalaureate degree with a concurrent
teacher certification to teacher candidates;
``(D) is implemented in coordination with the faculty of
the education, sciences, and mathematics departments of the
institution of higher education;
``(E) utilizes experienced teachers who have a demonstrated
record of success in teaching underserved students to
instruct teacher candidates in science, technology fields,
engineering, or mathematics disciplines;
``(F) provides teacher candidates with--
``(i) support services, including mentoring by experienced
teachers who have a demonstrated record of success in
teaching underserved students;
``(ii) exposure to, and field experience in, the classroom
within the first year of entering the qualified teacher
preparation program; and
``(iii) other related support practices while the teacher
candidates are participating in the program, and after such
candidates graduate from the isntitution of higher education
and are employed as teachers;
``(G) participates in partnerships which include the
institution of higher education and local educational
agencies and charter districts to provide opportunities for
teacher candidate field work;
``(H) focuses on increasing the number of teachers in the
science, technology fields, engineering, or mathematics
disciplines; and
``(I) encourages individuals from underrepresented
populations to enter into the teaching profession.
``SEC. 420O. PROGRAM PERIOD AND FUNDING.
``There shall be available to the Secretary to carry out
this subpart, from funds not otherwise appropriated, such
sums as may be necessary to provide TEACH Grants and Bonus
TEACH Grants in accordance with this subpart to each eligible
student.''.
PART B--CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE
SEC. 311. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
Title II (20 U.S.C. 1021 et seq.) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``PART C--CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE
``SEC. 231. DEFINITIONS.
``As used in this part:
``(1) Eligible institution.--The term `eligible
institution' means--
``(A) an institution of higher education that has a teacher
preparation program that meets the requirements of section
203(b)(2) and that is--
``(i) a part B institution (as defined in section 322);
``(ii) a Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in
section 502);
``(iii) a Tribal College or University (as defined in
section 316);
``(iv) an Alaska Native-serving institution (as defined in
section 317(b)); or
``(v) a Native Hawaiian-serving institution (as defined in
section 317(b));
``(B) a consortium of institutions described in
subparagraph (A); or
``(C) an institution described in subparagraph (A), or a
consortium described in subparagraph (B), in partnership with
any other institution of higher education, but only if the
center of excellence established under section 232 is located
at an institution described in subparagraph (A).
``(2) Highly qualified.--The term `highly qualified' when
used with respect to an individual means that the individual
is highly qualified as determined under section 9101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7801) or section 602 of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1401).
``(3) Scientifically based reading research.--The term
`scientifically based reading research' has the meaning given
such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6368).
``(4) Scientifically based research.--The term
`scientifically based research' has the meaning given such
term in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``SEC. 232. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
``(a) Program Authorized.--From the amounts appropriated to
carry out this part, the Secretary is authorized to award
competitive grants to eligible institutions to establish
centers of excellence.
``(b) Use of Funds.--Grants provided by the Secretary under
this part shall be used to ensure that current and future
teachers are highly qualified, by carrying out one or more of
the following activities:
``(1) Implementing reforms within teacher preparation
programs to ensure that such programs are preparing teachers
who are highly qualified, are able to understand
scientifically based research, and are able to use advanced
technology effectively in the classroom, including use for
instructional techniques to improve student academic
achievement, by--
``(A) retraining faculty; and
``(B) designing (or redesigning) teacher preparation
programs that--
``(i) prepare teachers to close student achievement gaps,
are based on rigorous academic content, scientifically based
research (including scientifically based reading research),
and challenging State student academic content standards; and
``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
``(2) Providing sustained and high-quality preservice
clinical experience, including the mentoring of prospective
teachers by exemplary teachers, substantially increasing
interaction between faculty at institutions of higher
education and new and experienced teachers, principals, and
other administrators at elementary schools or secondary
schools, and providing support, including preparation time,
for such interaction.
``(3) Developing and implementing initiatives to promote
retention of highly qualified teachers and principals,
including minority teachers and principals, including
programs that provide--
``(A) teacher or principal mentoring from exemplary
teachers or principals; or
``(B) induction and support for teachers and principals
during their first 3 years of employment as teachers or
principals, respectively.
``(4) Awarding scholarships based on financial need to help
students pay the costs of tuition, room, board, and other
expenses of completing a teacher preparation program.
``(5) Disseminating information on effective practices for
teacher preparation and successful teacher certification and
licensure assessment preparation strategies.
``(6) Activities authorized under sections 202, 203, and
204.
``(c) Application.--Any eligible institution desiring a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such a time, in such a manner, and accompanied
by such information the Secretary may require.
``(d) Minimum Grant Amount.--The minimum amount of each
grant under this part shall be $500,000.
``(e) Limitation on Administrative Expenses.--An eligible
institution that receives a grant under this part may not use
more than 2 percent of the grant funds for purposes of
administering the grant.
``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out this part.
``SEC. 233. APPROPRIATIONS.
``There shall be available to the Secretary, from funds not
otherwise appropriated, $50,000,000 for the period beginning
with fiscal year 2008 and ending with fiscal year 2012, to
carry out this part beginning with academic year 2008-2009,
which shall remain available until expended. The authority to
carry out this part shall expire at the end of fiscal year
2012.''.
TITLE IV--COLLEGE ACCESS CHALLENGE GRANT PROGRAM
SEC. 401. COLLEGE ACCESS CHALLENGE GRANTS.
(a) Challenge Grant Program Established.--
(1) Program established.--The Secretary shall establish a
program to award matching grants to philanthropic
organizations to increase the number of eligible students
from underserved populations who enter and complete college
by providing grants to philanthropic organizations who are
members of eligible consortia to carry out the activities of
the consortia to achieve this purpose, including--
(A) providing need-based grants to eligible students;
(B) providing support to eligible students through school-
or institution-based mentoring programs; and
(C) conducting outreach programs to encourage eligible
students to pursue higher education.
(2) Grant period; renewability.--Grants under this section
shall be awarded for one 5-year period, and may not be
renewed.
(3) Grant amounts.--
(A) In general.--A grant awarded under this part for a
given fiscal year to a philanthropic organization shall be in
an amount equal to lesser of--
(i) 200 percent of the amount of charitable gifts received
in the preceding fiscal year by the eligible consortia,
including charitable gifts received by the individual members
of the consortia; or
(ii) the maximum grant amount established by the Secretary
by regulation, pursuant to subsection (f).
(B) Gifts provided in cash or in-kind.--For the purposes of
subparagraph (A), the charitable gifts received by an
eligible consortia and its members may be provided in cash or
in-kind, including physical non-cash contributions of
monetary value such as property, facilities, and equipment,
but excluding services.
[[Page H7517]]
(b) Uses of Grant.--
(1) In general.--A philanthropic organization receiving a
grant under this section shall--
(A) provide grants to eligible students; and
(B) distribute grants to members of the consortia with
which the philanthropic organization is affiliated, in
accordance with the plan described in subsection (c)(2)(A),
to fund the activities of such consortia in accordance with
the application under subsection (c).
(2) Limitation.--Not more than 15 percent of the funds made
available annually through a grant under this section may be
used for administrative purposes.
(c) Applications.--A philanthropic organization desiring a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require. Such application
shall include the following:
(1) A description of an eligible consortia that meets the
requirements of subsection (d), with which the philanthropic
organization is affiliated, in accordance with subsection
(g).
(2) A detailed description of--
(A) the philanthropic organization's plans for distributing
the matching grant funds among the members of the eligible
consortia; and
(B) the eligible consortia's plans for using the matching
grant funds, including how the funds will be used to provide
financial aid, mentoring, and outreach programs to eligible
students.
(3) A plan to ensure the viability of the eligible
consortia and the work of the consortia beyond the grant
period.
(4) A detailed description of the activities that carry out
this section that are conducted by the eligible consortia at
the time of the application, and how the matching grant funds
will assist the eligible consortia with expanding and
enhancing such activities.
(5) A description of the organizational structure that will
be used to administer the activities carried out under the
plan, including a description of the system used to track the
participation of students who receive grants to degree
completion.
(6) A description of the strategies that will be used to
identify eligible students who are enrolled in secondary
school and who may benefit from the activities of the
eligible consortia.
(d) Eligible Consortia.--An eligible consortia with which a
philanthropic organization is affiliated for the program
under this section shall--
(1) be a partnership of mulitple entities that have agreed
to work together carry out this section, including--
(A) such philanthropic organization, which shall serve as
the manager of the consortia;
(B) a State that demonstrates a commitment to ensuring the
creation of a Statewide system to address the issues of early
intervention and financial support for eligible students to
enter and remain in college; and
(C) at the discretion of the philanthropic organization
described in subparagraph (A), additional partners, including
other non-profit organizations, government entities
(including local municipalities, school districts, cities,
and counties), institutions of higher education, and other
public or private programs that provide mentoring or outreach
programs; and
(2) conducts activites to assist eligible students with
entering and remaining in college, which include--
(A) providing need-based grants to eligible students;
(B) providing early notification to low-income students of
their potential eligibility for Federal financial aid, as
well as financial aid and other support available from the
eligible consortia;
(C) encouraging increased eligible student participation in
higher education through mentoring or outreach programs; and
(D) conducting marketing and outreach efforts that are
designed to--
(i) encourage full participation of eligible students in
the activities of the consortia that carry out the purposes
of this section; and
(ii) provide the communities impacted by the activities of
the consortia with a general knowledge about the efforts of
the consortia.
(e) Annual Report.--A philanthropic organization receiving
a grant under this section shall prepare and submit an annual
report to the Secretary on the activities carried out with
such grant. The report shall include--
(1) each activity that was provided to eligible students
over the course of the year;
(2) the cost of providing each such activity;
(3) the number and percentage of eligible students who
received grants, mentoring, and outreach services; and
(4) the total amount of charitable gifts received by the
eligible consortia (including its members) with which the
philanthropic organization is affiliated for the fiscal year.
(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate
regulations to carry out this section. Such regulations shall
include--
(1) the maximum grant amount that may be awarded to a
philanthropic organization under this section;
(2) the minimum amount of chartable gifts an eligible
consortia (including its members) shall receive in a fiscal
year for the philanthropic organization affiliated with such
consortia to be eligible for a grant under this section.
(g) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
(1) Eligible student.--The term ``eligible student'' means
an individual who--
(A) is a member of an underserved population;
(B) is enrolled--
(i) in a secondary school pursuing a high school diploma;
or
(ii) in an institution of higher education or is planning
to attend an institution of higher education; and
(C) either--
(i) is receiving, or has received, financial assistance or
support services from the consortium; or
(ii) meets 2 or more of the following criteria:
(I) Has an expected family contribution equal to zero (as
described in section 479) or a comparable alternative based
upon the State's approved criteria in section 415C(b)(4).
(II) Has qualified for a free lunch, or at the State's
discretion a reduced price lunch, under the school lunch
program established under the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act.
(III) Qualifies for the State's maximum need-based
undergraduate award.
(IV) Is participating in, or has participated in, a
Federal, State, institutional, or community mentoring or
outreach program, as recognized by the eligible consortia
carrying out activities under this section.
(2) Philanthropic organization.--The term ``philanthropic
organization'' means a non-profit organization--
(A) that does not receive funds under title IV of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 or under the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965;
(B) that is not a local educational agency or an insitution
of higher education;
(C) that has a demonstrated record of dispersing grant aid
to underserved populations to ensure access to, and
participation in, higher education;
(D) that is affiliated with an eligible consortia (as
defined in subsection (e)) to carry out this section; and
(E) the primary purpose of which is to provide financial
aid and support services to students from underrepresented
populations to increase the number of such students who enter
and remain in college.
(3) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and
Puerto Rico.
(4) Underserved population.--The term ``underserved
population'' means a group of individuals who traditionally
have not been well represented in the general population of
students who pursue and successfully complete a higher
education degree.
(h) Program Funding.--
(1) In general.--There shall be available to the Secretary
to carry out this section, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, $300,000,000 for the period beginning with
fiscal year 2008 and ending with fiscal year 2012.
(2) Use of excess funds.--If, at the end of a fiscal year,
the funds available for awarding grants under this section
exceed the amount necessary to make such grants, then all of
the excess funds shall remain available for the subsequent
fiscal year, and shall be used to award grants under section
401 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a) for
such subsequent fiscal year.
(i) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section shall
expire at the end of fiscal year 2012.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cardoza). Pursuant to House Resolution
531, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill,
modified by the amendment printed in part A of the House Report 110-
224, is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered as read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 2669
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited to as the ``College
Cost Reduction Act of 2007''.
(b) Table of Contents.--
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. References; effective date.
TITLE I--INVESTING IN STUDENT AID
Part A--Increasing the Purchasing Power of Pell Grants
Sec. 101. Mandatory Pell Grant Increases.
Sec. 102. Support for working students.
Sec. 103. Simplified needs test and automatic zero improvements.
Sec. 104. Definitions.
Part B--Making Student Loans More Affordable
Sec. 111. Interest rate reductions.
Sec. 112. Increases in loan limits.
Sec. 113. Reduction of lender special allowance payments.
Sec. 114. Elimination of exceptional performer status for lenders.
Sec. 115. Reduction of lender insurance percentage.
Sec. 116. Guaranty agency collection retention.
Sec. 117. Account maintenance fees.
Sec. 118. Increased loan fees from lenders.
Sec. 119. Student loan information.
Sec. 120. Market-based determination of lender returns.
Part C--Rewarding Service in Repayment
Sec. 131. Loan forgiveness for service in areas of national need.
[[Page H7518]]
``Sec. 428K. Loan forgiveness for service in areas of national need.
Sec. 132. Income-contingent repayment for public sector employees.
Sec. 133. Income-based repayment.
``Sec. 493C. Income-based repayment.
Sec. 134. Definition of economic hardship.
Sec. 135. Deferrals.
Sec. 136. Maximum repayment period.
Sec. 137. Deferral of loan repayment following active duty.
``Sec. 484C. Deferral of loan repayment following active duty.
Sec. 138. Sense of the Congress; report.
Part D--Sustaining the Perkins Loan Program
Sec. 141. Federal Perkins Loans.
TITLE II--REDUCING THE COST OF COLLEGE
Sec. 201. State commitment to affordable college education.
``Sec. 132. State commitment to affordable college education.
Sec. 202. Consumer information and public accountability in higher
education.
``Sec. 131. Consumer information and public accountability in higher
education.
Sec. 203. Incentives and rewards for low tuition.
``Sec. 401B. Incentives and rewards for low tuition.
Sec. 204. Cooperative education rewards for institutions that restrain
tuition increases.
``TITLE VIII--COOPERATIVE EDUCATION REWARDS FOR INSTITUTIONS THAT
RESTRAIN TUITION INCREASES
``Sec. 801. Definition of cooperative education.
``Sec. 802. Authorization of appropriations; reservations.
``Sec. 803. Grants for cooperative education.
``Sec. 804. Demonstration and innovation projects; training and
resource centers; and research.
TITLE III--ENSURING A HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHER IN EVERY CLASSROOM
Part A--TEACH Grants
Sec. 301. TEACH Grants.
``Subpart 9--TEACH Grants
``Sec. 420L. Program established.
``Sec. 420M. Eligibility; applications.
``Sec. 420N. Definitions.
``Sec. 420O. Program period and funding.
Part B--Centers of Excellence
Sec. 311. Centers of excellence.
``Part C--Centers of Excellence
``Sec. 231. Definitions.
``Sec. 232. Centers of excellence.
``Sec. 233. Appropriations.
TITLE IV--LEVERAGING FUNDS TO INCREASE COLLEGE ACCESS
Part A--Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and Universities and
Minority-Serving Institutions
Sec. 401. Investment in Historically Black Colleges and Universities
and Minority-Serving Institution.
``Part I--Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and Universities
and Other Minority-Serving Institutions
``Sec. 499A. Investment in Historically Black Colleges and Universities
and Other Minority-Serving Institution.
Part B--College Access Challenge Grants
Sec. 411. College Access Challenge grants.
Part C--Upward Bound
Sec. 412. Upward Bound.
TITLE V--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 501. Independent evaluation of distance education programs.
Sec. 502. Encouraging colleges and universities to ``go green''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES; EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) References.--Except as otherwise expressly provided,
whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in
terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other
provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a
section or other provision of the Higher Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.).
(b) Effective Date.--Except as otherwise expressly provided
therein, the amendments made by this Act shall be effective
on October 1, 2007.
TITLE I--INVESTING IN STUDENT AID
PART A--INCREASING THE PURCHASING POWER OF PELL GRANTS
SEC. 101. MANDATORY PELL GRANT INCREASES.
(a) Extension of Authority.--Section 401(a) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(a)) is amended by striking ``fiscal year 2004'' and
inserting ``fiscal year 2013''.
(b) Funding for Increases.--Section 401(b) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(9) Additional funds.--
``(A) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated,
and there are appropriated, to carry out subparagraph (B) of
this paragraph (in addition to any other amounts appropriated
to carry out this section and out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated) the following amounts:
``(i) $840,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
``(ii) $870,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
``(iii) $1,340,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
``(iv) $2,280,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
``(v) $2,350,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
``(vi) $2,400,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
``(vii) $2,450,000,000 for fiscal year 2014;
``(viii) $2,510,000,000 for fiscal year 2015;
``(ix) $2,550,000,000 for fiscal year 2016; and
``(x) $2,570,000,000 for fiscal year 2017.
``(B) Increase in federal pell grants.--The amounts made
available pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph
shall be used to increase the amount of the maximum Pell
Grant for which a student shall be eligible during an award
year, as specified in the last enacted appropriation Act
applicable to that award year, by--
``(i) $200 for each of the award years 2008-2009 and 2009-
2010;
``(ii) $300 for award year 2010-2011; and
``(iii) $500 for award year 2011-2012 and each subsequent
award year.
``(C) Use of fiscal year funds for award years.--The
amounts made available by subparagraph (A) for any fiscal
year shall be available and remain available for use under
subparagraph (B) for the award year that begins in such
fiscal year.''.
(c) Authorized Maximums.--Section 401(b)(2)(A) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(b)(2)(A)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2)(A) The amount of the Federal Pell Grant for a student
eligible under this part shall be--
``(i) $7,600 for academic year 2008-2009;
``(ii) $8,600 for academic year 2009-2010;
``(iii) $9,600 for academic year 2010-2011;
``(iv) $10,600 for academic year 2011-2012; and
``(v) $11,600 for academic year 2012-2013,
less an amount equal to the amount determined to be the
expected family contribution with respect to that student for
that year.''.
(d) Tuition Sensitivity.--
(1) Amendment.--Section 401(b) (20 U.S.C. 1070a(b)) is
further amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (3); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (9) as
paragraphs (3) through (8), respectively.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by paragraph (1)
of this subsection are effective on the date of enactment of
this Act.
(3) Appropriation.--There shall be available to the
Secretary, from funds not otherwise appropriated, $5,000,000
for the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act
and ending on October 1, 2008, to carry out the amendments
made by paragraph (1) of this subsection.
(e) Multiple Grants.--
(1) Amendment.--Paragraph (5) of section 401(b) (as
redesignated by subsection (d)(1)(B)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(5) Year-round pell grants.--The Secretary is authorized,
for students enrolled in a baccalaureate degree, associate's
degree, or certificate program of study at an eligible
institution, to award such students not more than two Pell
grants during an award year to permit such students to
accelerate progress toward their degree or certificate
objectives by enrolling in courses for more than 2 semesters,
or 3 quarters, or the equivalent, in a given academic
year.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall be effective July 1, 2009.
(f) Academic Competitiveness Grants.--Section 401A (as
amended by section 8003 of Public Law 109-171) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(3)(A)(ii), by inserting ``, except as
part of a secondary school program of study'' before the
semicolon;
(2) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
(3) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new
subsection:
``(g) Determination of Academic Year.--Notwithstanding
section 481(a)(2), for the purpose of determining eligibility
for a grant under this section, a student shall be considered
to be enrolled or accepted for enrollment in the first,
second, third, or fourth academic year of a program of
undergraduate education based on the student's class
standing, as determined by the institution of higher
education at which the student is enrolled or accepted for
enrollment.''.
(g) Eligibility for Academic Competitiveness Grants.--
Section 401A is further amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking ``full-time''; and
(B) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) is an eligible student under section 484, including
being enrolled or accepted for enrollment in a degree,
certificate, or other eligible program leading to a
recognized educational credential at an institution of higher
education;''; and
(2) in subsection (d), by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(3) Adjustment for less than full-time enrollment.--A
grant awarded under this section to an eligible student who
attends an eligible institution on a less than full-time (but
at least half-time or more) basis shall be reduced in the
same proportion as would a Federal Pell Grant pursuant to
section 401(b)(2)(B).''.
SEC. 102. SUPPORT FOR WORKING STUDENTS.
(a) Dependent Students.--Subparagraph (D) of section
475(g)(2) (20 U.S.C. 1087oo)(g)(2)(D)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(D) an income protection allowance of $3,750 (or a
successor amount prescribed by the Secretary under section
478);''.
(b) Independent Students Without Dependents Other Than a
Spouse.--Clause (iv) of section 476(b)(1)(A) (20 U.S.C.
1087pp(b)(1)(A)(iv)) is amended to read as follows:
``(iv) an income protection allowance of the following
amount (or a successor amount prescribed by the Secretary
under section 478)--
``(I) for single or separated students, or married
students where both are enrolled pursuant to subsection
(a)(2), $6,690; and
``(II) for married students where 1 is enrolled pursuant
to subsection (a)(2), $10,720;''.
(c) Updated Tables and Amounts.--Section 478(b) (20 U.S.C.
1087rr(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``Revised tables.--For each'' and inserting
``Revised tables.--
``(A) In general.--For each'';
(B) in subparagraph (A) (as designated by subparagraph
(A)), in the third sentence--
(i) by striking ``preceding sentence'' and inserting
``subparagraph (A)''; and
[[Page H7519]]
(ii) by striking ``For the 2007-2008'' and inserting the
following:
``(B) Special rule for 2007-2008 academic year.--For the
2007-2008''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Special rule for 2009-2010 through 2012-2013 academic
years.--For the 2009-2010 academic year, and for each of the
3 succeeding academic years, the Secretary shall revise the
tables in accordance with this paragraph, except that, for
the table in section 477(b)(4), the Secretary shall revise
such table by increasing the amounts contained in such table
for the preceding academic year by 10 percent.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``shall be developed''
and all that follows through the period at the end and
inserting ``shall be developed--
``(A) for academic year 2008-2009, by increasing each of
the dollar amounts contained in such section as such section
was in effect on the day before the date of enactment of the
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 by a percentage equal to
the estimated percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index
(as defined in section 478(f)) between December 2006 and the
December next preceding the beginning of such academic year,
and rounding the result to the nearest $10;
``(B) for each of the academic years 2010-2011 and 2011-
2012, by increasing each of the amounts determined under this
paragraph for the preceding academic year by 10 percent; and
``(C) for each academic year after 2012-2013, by increasing
each of the dollar amounts determined under this paragraph
for academic year 2012-2013 by a percentage equal to the
estimated percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (as
defined in section 478(f)) between December 2011 and the
December next preceding the beginning of such academic year,
and rounding the result to the nearest $10.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (a)
and (b) shall take effect on July 1, 2009, and the amendment
made by subsection (c) shall take effect on July 1, 2008.
SEC. 103. SIMPLIFIED NEEDS TEST AND AUTOMATIC ZERO
IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) Simplified Needs Test.--Section 479 (20 U.S.C. 1087ss)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A)(i)--
(i) in subclause (II), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(ii) by redesignating subclause (III) as subclause (IV);
(iii) by inserting after subclause (II) the following:
``(III) 1 of whom is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(iv) in subclause (IV) (as redesignated by clause (ii)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month''; and
(B) in paragraph (1)(B)(i)--
(i) in subclause (II), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(ii) by redesignating subclause (III) as subclause (IV);
(iii) by inserting after subclause (II) the following:
``(III) 1 of whom is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(iv) in subclause (IV) (as redesignated by clause (ii)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month'';
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in clause (ii), by striking ``or'' after the semicolon;
(II) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv);
(III) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
``(iii) 1 of whom is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(IV) in clause (iv) (as redesignated by subclause (II)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$20,000'' and
inserting ``$30,000''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in clause (ii), by striking ``or'' after the semicolon;
(II) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv);
(III) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
``(iii) is a dislocated worker; or''; and
(IV) in clause (iv) (as redesignated by subclause (II)), by
striking ``12-month'' and inserting ``24-month''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$20,000'' and
inserting ``$30,000''; and
(C) in the flush matter following paragraph (2)(B), by
adding at the end the following: ``The Secretary shall
annually adjust the income level necessary to qualify an
applicant for the zero expected family contribution. The
income level shall be adjusted according to increases in the
Consumer Price Index, as defined in section 478(f).''; and
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (6) as
subparagraphs (A) through (F), respectively and moving the
margins of such subparagraphs 2 ems to the right;
(B) by striking ``(d) Definition'' and all that follows
through ``the term'' and inserting the following:
``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Dislocated worker.--The term `dislocated worker' has
the meaning given the term in section 101 of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801).
``(2) Means-tested federal benefit program.--The term''.
(b) Discretion of Student Financial Aid Administrators.--
Section 479A(a) (20 U.S.C. 1087tt(a)) is amended in the third
sentence by inserting ``a family member who is a dislocated
worker (as defined in section 101 of the Workforce Investment
Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801)),'' after ``recent unemployment
of a family member,''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall be effective on July 1, 2009.
SEC. 104. DEFINITIONS.
(a) Total Income.--Section 480(a)(2) (20 U.S.C.
1087vv(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and no portion'' and inserting ``no
portion''; and
(2) by inserting ``and no distribution from any qualified
education benefit described in subsection (f)(3) that is not
subject to Federal income tax,'' after ``1986,''.
(b) Untaxed Income and Benefits.--Section 480(b) (20 U.S.C.
1087vv(b)) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Untaxed Income and Benefits.--
``(1) The term `untaxed income and benefits' means--
``(A) child support received;
``(B) workman's compensation;
``(C) veteran's benefits such as death pension, dependency,
and indemnity compensation, but excluding veterans' education
benefits as defined in subsection (c);
``(D) interest on tax-free bonds;
``(E) housing, food, and other allowances (excluding rent
subsidies for low-income housing) for military, clergy, and
others (including cash payments and cash value of benefits);
``(F) cash support or any money paid on the student`s
behalf, except, for dependent students, funds provided by the
student's parents;
``(G) untaxed portion of pensions;
``(H) payments to individual retirement accounts and Keogh
accounts excluded from income for Federal income tax
purposes; and
``(I) any other untaxed income and benefits, such as Black
Lung Benefits, Refugee Assistance, railroad retirement
benefits, or Job Training Partnership Act noneducational
benefits or benefits received through participation in
employment and training activities under title I of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.).
``(2) The term `untaxed income and benefits' shall not
include the amount of additional child tax credit claimed for
Federal income tax purposes.''.
(c) Assets.--Section 480(f) (20 U.S.C. 1087vv(f)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``shall not be considered
an asset of a student for purposes of section 475'' and
inserting ``shall be considered an asset of the parent for
purposes of section 475'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(5) and (6), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) A qualified education benefit shall be considered an
asset of the student for purposes of section 476 and 477.''.
(d) Other Financial Assistance.--Section 480(j)(2) (20
U.S.C. 1087vv(j)(2)) is amended by inserting ``, or a
distribution that is not includable in gross income under
section 529 of such Code, under another prepaid tuition plan
offered by a State, or under a Coverdell education savings
account under section 530 of such Code,'' after ``1986''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall be effective on July 1, 2009.
PART B--MAKING STUDENT LOANS MORE AFFORDABLE
SEC. 111. INTEREST RATE REDUCTIONS.
(a) FFEL Interest Rates.--
(1) Section 427A(l) (20 U.S.C. 1077a(l)) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Reduced rates for undergraduate subsidized loans.--
Notwithstanding subsection (h) and paragraph (1) of this
subsection, with respect to any loan to an undergraduate
student made, insured, or guaranteed under this part (other
than a loan made pursuant to section 428B, 428C, or 428H) for
which the first disbursement is made on or after July 1,
2006, and before July 1, 2013, the applicable rate of
interest shall be as follows:
``(A) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2006, and before July 1, 2008, 6.80
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(B) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2008, and before July 1, 2009, 6.12
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(C) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2009, and before July 1, 2010, 5.44
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(D) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2010, and before July 1, 2011, 4.76
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(E) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2011, and before July 1, 2012, 4.08
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(F) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2012 and before July 1, 2013, 3.40
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.''.
(2) Special allowance cross reference.--Section
438(b)(2)(I)(ii)(II) (20 U.S.C. 1086(b)(2)(I)(ii)(II)) is
amended by striking ``section 427A(l)(1)'' and inserting
``section 427A(l)(1) or (l)(4)''.
(b) Direct Loan Interest Rates.--Section 455(b)(7) (20
U.S.C. 1087e(b)(7)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subparagraph:
``(D) Reduced rates for undergraduate fdsl.--
Notwithstanding the preceding paragraphs of this subsection,
for Federal Direct Stafford Loans made to undergraduate
students for which the first disbursement is made on or after
July 1, 2006, and before July 1, 2013, the applicable rate of
interest shall be as follows:
``(i) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2006, and before
[[Page H7520]]
July 1, 2008, 6.80 percent on the unpaid principal balance of
the loan.
``(ii) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2008, and before July 1, 2009, 6.12
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(iii) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2009, and before July 1, 2010, 5.44
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(iv) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2010, and before July 1, 2011, 4.76
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(v) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2011, and before July 1, 2012, 4.08
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
``(vi) For a loan for which the first disbursement is made
on or after July 1, 2012, and before July 1, 2013, 3.40
percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.''.
SEC. 112. INCREASES IN LOAN LIMITS.
(a) Increase in Third and Subsequent Year Limits.--
(1) Federal insurance limits.--Section 425(a)(1)(A)(iii)
(20 U.S.C. 1075(a)(1)(A)(iii)) is amended by striking
``$5,500'' and inserting ``$7,500''.
(2) Guaranty limits.--Section 428(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I) (20
U.S.C. 1078(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I)) is amended by striking
``$5,500'' and inserting ``$7,500''.
(b) Increase in Aggregate Limits.--
(1) Federal insurance limits.--Section 425(a)(2)(A) (20
U.S.C. 1075(a)(2)(A)(i)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``$23,000'' and inserting
``$30,500''; and
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``$65,500'' and inserting
``$73,000''.
(2) Guaranty limits.--Section 428(b)(1)(B) (20 U.S.C.
1078(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``$23,000'' and inserting
``$30,500''; and
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``$65,500'' and inserting
``$73,000''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall be effective July 1, 2008.
SEC. 113. REDUCTION OF LENDER SPECIAL ALLOWANCE PAYMENTS.
Section 438(b)(2)(I) (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b)(2)(I)) is
amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``clauses (ii), (iii), and
(iv)'' and inserting ``the following clauses'';
(2) in clause (v)(III), by striking ``clauses (ii), (iii),
and (iv)'' and inserting ``clauses (ii), (iii), (iv), and
(vi)''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(vi) Reduction for loans on or after october 1, 2007.--
With respect to a loan on which the applicable interest rate
is determined under section 427A(l), the percentage to be
added under clause (i)(III) in computing the special
allowance payment pursuant to this subparagraph shall be the
following:
``(I) In general and plus loans.--1.79 percent in the case
of a loan described in clause (i) or (iii) for which the
first disbursement of principal is made on or after October
1, 2007.
``(II) In school and grace period.--1.19 percent in the
case of a loan described in clause (ii)(II) for which the
first disbursement of principal is made on or after October
1, 2007.
``(III) Consolidation loans.--2.09 percent in the case of a
loan described in clause (iv) made on or after October 1,
2007.''.
SEC. 114. ELIMINATION OF EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMER STATUS FOR
LENDERS.
(a) Elimination of Status.--Part B of title IV (20 U.S.C.
1071 et seq.) is amended by striking section 428I (20 U.S.C.
1078-9).
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Part B of title IV is further
amended--
(1) in section 428(c)(1) (20 U.S.C. 1078(c)(1))--
(A) by striking subparagraph (D); and
(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) through (H) as
subparagraphs (D) through (G), respectively; and
(2) in section 438(b)(5) (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b)(5)), by
striking the matter following subparagraph (B).
SEC. 115. REDUCTION OF LENDER INSURANCE PERCENTAGE.
(a) Amendment.--Subparagraph (G) of section 428(b)(1) (20
U.S.C. 1078(b)(1)(G)) is amended to read as follows:
``(G) insures 95 percent of the unpaid principal of loans
insured under the program, except that--
``(i) such program shall insure 100 percent of the unpaid
principal of loans made with funds advanced pursuant to
section 428(j) or 439(q); and
``(ii) notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this
subparagraph, such program shall insure 100 percent of the
unpaid principal amount of exempt claims as defined in
subsection (c)(1)(G);''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect with respect to loans made on or after
October 1, 2007.
SEC. 116. GUARANTY AGENCY COLLECTION RETENTION.
Clause (ii) of section 428(c)(6)(A) (20 U.S.C.
1078(c)(6)(A)(ii)) is amended to read as follows:
``(ii) an amount equal to 23 percent of such payments for
use in accordance with section 422B, except that beginning
October 1, 2007, this subparagraph shall be applied by
substituting `16 percent' for `23 percent'.''.
SEC. 117. UNIT COSTS FOR ACCOUNT MAINTENANCE FEES.
Section 458(b) (20 U.S.C. 1087h(b)) is amended by striking
``0.10 percent'' and inserting ``0.06 percent''.
SEC. 118. INCREASED LOAN FEES FROM LENDERS.
Paragraph (2) of section 438(d) (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(d)(2)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(2) Amount of loan fees.--
``(A) Amount.--The amount of the loan fee which shall be
deducted under paragraph (1), but which may not be collected
from the borrower, shall be equal to--
``(i) except as provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), 0.50
percent of the principal amount of the loan with respect to
any loan under this part for which the first disbursement was
made on or after October 1, 1993;
``(ii) 1.0 percent of the principal amount of the loan with
respect to any loan under this part for which the first
disbursement was made on or after October 1, 2007, that is
held by any holder other than a holder described in subclause
(I) or (II) of clause (iii); and
``(iii) 0.0 percent of the principal amount of the loan
with respect to any loan under this part for which the first
disbursement was made on or after October 1, 2007, that is
held by--
``(I) any holder that, together with its affiliated
holders, is designated by the Secretary annually as a small
lender under subparagraph (B); or
``(II) any holder that--
``(aa) is a unit of a State or local government or a
nonprofit private entity; and
``(bb) is not owned in whole or in part by, or controlled
or operated by a for-profit entity.
``(B) Designation of small lenders.--In determining which
holders of eligible loans qualify as small lenders for
purposes of subparagraph (A)(iii)(I), the Secretary shall,
using the most recently available data with respect to the
total principal amount of eligible loans held by holders--
``(i) rank all holders of eligible loans (combined with
their affiliated holders) in descending order by total
principal amount of eligible loans held;
``(ii) calculate the total principal amount of eligible
loans held by all holders; and
``(iii) identify the subset of consecutively ranked holders
under clause (i), starting with the lowest ranked holder,
that together hold a total principal amount of such loans
equal to 15 percent of the total amount calculated under
clause (ii), but excluding the holder, if any, whose holdings
when added cause the total holdings of the subset to equal
but not exceed such 15 percent of such total amount
calculated; and
``(iv) designate as small lenders any holder identified as
a member of the subset under clause (iii).''.
SEC. 119. MARKET-BASED DETERMINATION OF LENDER RETURNS.
(a) Joint Planning Study To Select Auction Mechanisms for
Testing.--
(1) Planning study.--The Secretaries of Education and
Treasury jointly shall conduct a planning study, in
consultation with the Office of Management and Budget, the
Congressional Budget Office, the General Accounting Office,
and other individuals and entities the Secretaries determines
appropriate, to--
(A) examine the matters described in paragraph (2) in order
to determine which market-based mechanisms for determining
lender returns on loans made, insured, or guaranteed under
part B of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1071 et seq.) shall be tested under the pilot programs
described in subsection (c); and
(B) determine what related administrative and other changes
will be required in order to ensure that high-quality
services are provided under a successful implementation of
market-based determinations of lender returns for all loans
made, insured, or guaranteed under such part.
(2) Matters examined.--The planning study under this
subsection shall examine--
(A) whether it is most appropriate to auction existing
loans under part B of title IV of such Act, to auction the
rights to originate loans under such part, or whether the
sale of securities backed by federally-owned student loan
assets originated by banks acting as agents of the Federal
Government would provide the most efficient market-based
alternative;
(B) matters related to efficient financial organization of
any auctions or sales of loans under such part, including how
loans and origination rights are bundled, the capital
structure of any securitization plan, and issues related to
servicing; and
(C) how to ensure that statutory, regulatory, and
administrative requirements do not impede separate management
and ownership of loans or assets backed by loans under part B
of title IV of such Act.
(3) Mechanisms.--In determining which market-based
mechanisms are the most promising models to test the pilot
programs under subsection (b), the planning study shall take
into account whether a particular market-based mechanism
will--
(A) ensure loan availability under part B of title IV of
such Act to all eligible students at all participating
institutions;
(B) minimize administrative complexity for borrowers,
institutions, lenders, and the Federal Government; and
(C) reduce Federal costs if used on a program-wide basis.
(4) Report.--A report on the results of the planning study,
together with a plan for implementation of one or more pilot
programs using promising market-based approaches for
determining lender returns, shall be transmitted to Congress
not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this
Act.
(b) Pilot Programs To Be Tested.--
(1) Authorization.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, after the report described in subsection (a)(4) is
transmitted to Congress, the Secretary of Education shall, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, begin
preparations necessary to carry out pilot programs meeting
the requirements of this subsection in accordance with the
implementation plan included in such report.
[[Page H7521]]
(B) Implementation date.--The Secretary of Education shall
commence implementation of the pilot programs under this
subsection not earlier than July 1, 2008.
(C) Duration and loan volume.--The pilot programs under
this subsection shall be not more than two academic years in
duration, and the Secretary of Education may use the pilot
programs to determining the lender returns for not more
than--
(i) 10 percent of the annual loan volume under part B of
title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 during the first
year of the pilot programs under this subsection; and
(ii) 20 percent of the annual loan volume under part B of
title IV of such Act during the second year of the pilot
programs under this subsection.
(2) Voluntary participation.--
(A) Participation in any auction-based pilot program under
this subsection shall be voluntary for eligible institutions
and eligible lenders participating under part B of title IV
of such Act prior to July 1, 2006.
(B) All savings to the United States Treasury generated by
such auctions shall be distributed to institutions
participating under this subsection on a basis proportionate
to loan volume under such part for supplemental, need-based
financial aid, except that an institution that is operating
as an eligible lender under section 435(d)(2) of such Act
shall not be eligible for any such distribution.
(3) Independent evaluation.--The Government Accountability
Office shall conduct an independent evaluation of the pilot
programs under this subsection, which evaluation shall be
completed, and the results of such submitted to the Secretary
of Education, the Secretary of the Treasury, and Congress,
not later than 120 days after the termination of such pilot
programs.
(c) Program-Wide Implementation.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of part B of title IV of the Higher Education Act
of 1965, for the first academic year beginning not less than
120 days after the independent evaluation described in
subsection (b)(3) has been transmitted to Congress, and
succeeding academic years, the Secretary of Education is
authorized to implement for all loans made under such part, a
program-wide, market-based system to determine returns to all
lenders as the Secretary of Education determines appropriate,
provided that--
(1) the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the
Secretary of the Treasury, has certified that the auction-
based system that the Secretary of Education intends to
implement on a program-wide basis would--
(A) ensure loan availability under such part to all
eligible students at all participating institutions;
(B) minimize administrative complexity for borrowers,
institutions, lenders, and the Federal Government, including
the enhancement of the modernization of the student financial
aid system; and
(C) reduce Federal costs when used on a program-wide basis;
and
(2) the Secretary of Education has notified Congress of the
Secretary's intent to implement a program-wide auction based
system, and has provided a description of the structure of
such auction-based system, at least 120 days before
implementing such system.
(d) Consultation.--
(1) In general.--As part of the planning study, pilot
programs, and program-wide implementation phases described in
this section, the Secretary of Education shall consult with
representatives of investment banks, ratings agencies,
lenders, institutions of higher education, and students, as
well as individuals or other entities with pertinent
technical expertise. The Secretary of Education shall engage
in such consultations using such methods as, and to the
extent that, the Secretary determines appropriate to the time
constraints associated with the study, programs, and
implementation.
(2) Services of other federal agencies.--In carrying out
the planning study and pilot programs described in this
section, the Secretary of Education may use, on a
reimbursable basis, the services (including procurement
authorities and services), equipment, personnel, and
facilities of other agencies and instrumentalities of the
Federal Government.
SEC. 120. OTHER GUARANTY AGENCY REFORMS.
(a) Agency Operating Funds.--Section 422B(c) (20 U.S.C.
1072b(c)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
(2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new
paragraph:
``(6) the delinquency prevention fee paid by the Secretary
in accordance with section 428(o); and''.
(b) Delinquency Prevention Fee.--Section 428 (20 U.S.C.
1078) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(o) Delinquency Prevention Fee.--
``(1) Amount of fee.--The Secretary shall pay to each
guaranty agency, on a monthly basis, a delinquency prevention
fee equal to 0.0055 percent of the original principal amount
of loans insured by the agency, other than loans in in-school
or grace period status, that are not in delinquency status as
of the end of the previous month.
``(2) Definition.--For the purpose of earning the
delinquency prevention fee, the term `not in delinquency
status' means the borrower is less than 60 days delinquent in
making a required payment.''.
(c) Minimum Loan Processing and Issuance Fees.--Section
428(f)(1)(A)(ii) (20 U.S.C. 1078(f)(1)(A)(ii)) is amended by
inserting before the period at the end the following: ``,
except that the total amount of such payments to each
guaranty agency in any fiscal year shall equal at least
$1,500,000''.
Page 46, line 1, redesignate paragraph (9) as paragraph
(10) and insert before such line the following new paragraph:
``(9) School counselors.--An individual who is employed as
a school counselor (as such term is defined in section
5421(e)(3) of Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 7245(e)(3)) in an elementary or secondary school
which is in the school district of a local educational agency
which is eligible in such year for assistance pursuant to
title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, and which for the purpose of this paragraph and for
that year has been determined by the Secretary (pursuant to
regulations and after consultation with the State educational
agency of the State in which the school is located) to be a
school in which the enrollment of children counted under
section 1113(a)(5) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 exceeds 30 percent of the total enrollment of
that school.
PART C--REWARDING SERVICE IN REPAYMENT
SEC. 131. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR SERVICE IN AREAS OF NATIONAL
NEED.
Section 428K (20 U.S.C. 1078-11) is amended to read as
follows:
``SEC. 428K. LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR SERVICE IN AREAS OF
NATIONAL NEED.
``(a) Program Authorized.--
``(1) Loan forgiveness authorized.--The Secretary shall
forgive, in accordance with this section, the student loan
obligation of a borrower in the amount specified in
subsection (c), for any new borrower after the date of
enactment of the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007, who--
``(A) is employed full-time in an area of national need
described in subsection (b); and
``(B) is not in default on a loan for which the borrower
seeks forgiveness.
``(2) Method of loan forgiveness.--To provide loan
forgiveness under paragraph (1), the Secretary is authorized
to carry out a program--
``(A) through the holder of the loan, to assume the
obligation to repay a qualified loan amount for a loan made,
insured, or guaranteed under this part; and
``(B) to cancel a qualified loan amount for a loan made
under part D of this title.
``(3) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
``(b) Areas of National Need.--For purposes of this
section, an individual shall be treated as employed in an
area of national need if the individual is employed full-time
as any of the following:
``(1) Early childhood educators.--An individual who is
employed as an early childhood educator in an eligible
preschool program or eligible early childhood education
program in a low-income community, and who is involved
directly in the care, development, and education of infants,
toddlers, or young children age 5 and under.
``(2) Nurses.--An individual who is employed--
``(A) as a nurse in a clinical setting; or
``(B) as a member of the nursing faculty at an accredited
school of nursing (as those terms are defined in section 801
of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(3) Foreign language specialists.--An individual who has
obtained a baccalaureate degree in a critical foreign
language and is employed--
``(A) in an elementary or secondary school as a teacher of
a critical foreign language; or
``(B) in an agency of the United States Government in a
position that regularly requires the use of such critical
foreign language.
``(4) Librarians.--An individual who is employed as a
librarian in--
``(A) a public library that serves a geographic area within
which the public schools have a combined average of 30
percent or more of their total student enrollments composed
of children counted under section 1113(a)(5) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; or
``(B) an elementary or secondary school which is in the
school district of a local educational agency which is
eligible in such year for assistance pursuant to title I of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and which
for the purpose of this paragraph and for that year has been
determined by the Secretary (pursuant to regulations and
after consultation with the State educational agency of the
State in which the school is located) to be a school in which
the enrollment of children counted under section 1113(a)(5)
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 exceeds
30 percent of the total enrollment of that school.
``(5) Highly qualified teachers: bilingual education and
low-income communities.--An individual who--
``(A) is highly qualified as such term is defined in
section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965; and
``(B)(i) is employed as a full-time teacher of bilingual
education; or
``(ii) is employed as a teacher in a public or nonprofit
private elementary or secondary school which is in the school
district of a local educational agency which is eligible in
such year for assistance pursuant to title I of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and which for
the purpose of this paragraph and for that year has been
determined by the Secretary (pursuant to regulations and
after consultation with the State educational agency of the
State in which the school is located) to be a school in which
the enrollment of children counted under section 1113(a)(5)
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 exceeds
40 percent of the total enrollment of that school.
``(6) Child welfare workers.--An individual who--
``(A) has obtained a degree in social work or a related
field with a focus on serving children and families; and
[[Page H7522]]
``(B) is employed in public or private child welfare
services.
``(7) Speech-language pathologists.--An individual who is a
speech-language pathologist, who is employed in an eligible
preschool program or an elementary or secondary school, and
who has, at a minimum, a graduate degree in speech-language
pathology, or communication sciences and disorders.
``(8) National service.--An individual who is engaged as a
participant in a project under the National and Community
Service Act of 1990 (as such terms are defined in section 101
of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12511)).
``(9) Public sector employees.--An individual who is
employed in public safety (including as a first responder,
firefighter, police officer, or other law enforcement or
public safety officer), emergency management (including as an
emergency medical technician), public health, or public
interest legal services (including prosecution or public
``defense or legal advocacy in low-income communities at a
nonprofit organization)''.
``(c) Qualified Loan Amount.--At the end of each school,
academic, or calendar year of full-time employment in an area
of national need described in subsection (b), not to exceed 5
years, the Secretary shall forgive not more than $1,000 of
the student loan obligation of a borrower that is outstanding
after the completion of each such school, academic, or
calendar year of employment, as appropriate, not to exceed
$5,000 in the aggregate for any borrower.
``(d) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to authorize the refunding of any repayment of a
loan.
``(e) Segal Americorps Education Award and National Service
Award Recipients.--A student borrower who qualifies for the
maximum education award under subtitle D of title I of the
National and Community Service Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12601
et seq.) shall receive under this section the amount, if any,
by which the maximum benefit available under this section
exceeds the maximum education award available under such
subtitle.
``(f) Ineligibility for Double Benefits.--No borrower may
receive a reduction of loan obligations under both this
section and section 428J or 460.
``(g) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Critical foreign language.--The term `critical
foreign language' includes the languages of Arabic, Korean,
Japanese, Chinese, Pashto, Persian-Farsi, Serbian-Croatian,
Russian, Portuguese, and any other language identified by the
Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Defense
Language Institute, the Foreign Service Institute, and the
National Security Education Program, as a critical foreign
language need.
``(2) Early childhood educator.--The term `early childhood
educator' means an early childhood educator who works
directly with children in an eligible preschool program or
eligible early childhood education program who has completed
a baccalaureate or advanced degree in early childhood
development, early childhood education, or in a field related
to early childhood education.
``(3) Eligible preschool program.--The term `eligible
preschool program' means a program that provides for the
care, development, and education of infants, toddlers, or
young children age 5 and under, meets any applicable State or
local government licensing, certification, approval, and
registration requirements, and is operated by--
``(A) a public or private school that is supported,
sponsored, supervised, or administered by a local educational
agency;
``(B) a Head Start agency serving as a grantee designated
under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.);
``(C) a nonprofit or community based organization; or
``(D) a child care program, including a home.
``(4) Eligible early childhood education program.--The term
`eligible early childhood education program' means--
``(A) a family child care program, center-based child care
program, State prekindergarten program, school program, or
other out-of-home early childhood development care program,
that--
``(i) is licensed or regulated by the State; and
``(ii) serves 2 or more unrelated children who are not old
enough to attend kindergarten;
``(B) a Head Start Program carried out under the Head Start
Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.); or
``(C) an Early Head Start Program carried out under section
645A of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9840a).
``(5) Low-income community.--In this subsection, the term
`low-income community' means a community in which 70 percent
of households earn less than 85 percent of the State median
household income.
``(6) Nurse.--The term `nurse' means a nurse who meets all
of the following:
``(A) The nurse graduated from--
``(i) an accredited school of nursing (as those terms are
defined in section 801 of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 296));
``(ii) a nursing center; or
``(iii) an academic health center that provides nurse
training.
``(B) The nurse holds a valid and unrestricted license to
practice nursing in the State in which the nurse practices in
a clinical setting.
``(C) The nurse holds one or more of the following:
``(i) A graduate degree in nursing, or an equivalent
degree.
``(ii) A nursing degree from a collegiate school of nursing
(as defined in section 801 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(iii) A nursing degree from an associate degree school of
nursing (as defined in section 801 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(iv) A nursing degree from a diploma school of nursing
(as defined in section 801 of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 296)).
``(7) Speech-language pathologist.--The term `speech-
language pathologist' means a speech-language pathologist
who--
``(A) has received, at a minimum, a graduate degree in
speech-language pathology or communication sciences and
disorders from an institution of higher education accredited
by an agency or association recognized by the Secretary
pursuant to section 496(a) of this Act; and
``(B) provides speech-language pathology services under
section 1861(ll)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395x(ll)(1), or meets or exceeds the qualifications for a
qualified speech-language pathologist under subsection
(ll)(3) of such section (42 U.S.C. 1395x(ll)(3)).
``(h) Program Funding.--There shall be available to the
Secretary to carry out this section, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, such sums as may be necessary to provide loan
forgiveness in accordance with this section to each eligible
individual.''.
SEC. 132. INCOME-CONTINGENT REPAYMENT FOR PUBLIC SECTOR
EMPLOYEES.
Section 455(e) (20 U.S.C. 1087e(e)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(7) Repayment plan for public sector employees.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall forgive the balance
due on any loan made under this part or section 428C(b)(5)
for a borrower--
``(i) who has made 120 payments on such loan pursuant to
income-contingent repayment; and
``(ii) who is employed, and was employed for the 10-year
period in which the borrower made the 120 payments described
in clause (i), in a public sector job.
``(B) Public sector job.--In this paragraph, the term
`public sector job' means a full-time job in emergency
management, government, public safety, law enforcement,
public health, education (including early childhood
education), social work in a public child or family service
agency, public interest legal services (including prosecution
or public ``defense or legal advocacy in low-income
communities at a nonprofit organization), or at an
organization that is described in section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under
section 501(a) of such Code''.
``(8) Return to standard repayment.--A borrower who is
repaying a loan made under this part pursuant to income-
contingent repayment may choose, at any time, to terminate
repayment pursuant to income-contingent repayment and repay
such loan under the standard repayment plan.''.
SEC. 133. INCOME-BASED REPAYMENT.
(a) Amendment.--Part G of title IV (20 U.S.C. 1088 et seq.)
is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 493C. INCOME-BASED REPAYMENT.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Excepted plus loan.--The term `excepted PLUS loan'
means a loan under section 428B, or a Federal Direct PLUS
Loan, that is made, insured, or guaranteed on behalf of a
dependent student.
``(2) Partial financial hardship.--The term `partial
financial hardship', when used with respect to a borrower,
means that for such borrower--
``(A) the annual amount due on the total amount of loans
made, insured, or guaranteed under part B or D (other than an
excepted PLUS loan) to a borrower as calculated under the
standard repayment plan under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or
455(d)(1)(A); exceeds
``(B) 15 percent of the result obtained by calculating the
amount by which--
``(i) the borrower's, and the borrower's spouse's (if
applicable), adjusted gross income; exceeds
``(ii) 150 percent of the poverty line applicable to the
borrower's family size as determined under section 673(2) of
the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9902(2)).
``(b) Income-Based Repayment Program Authorized.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the
Secretary shall carry out a program under which--
``(1) a borrower of any loan made, insured, or guaranteed
under part B or D (other than an excepted PLUS loan) who has
a partial financial hardship may elect, during any period the
borrower has the partial financial hardship, to have the
borrower's aggregate monthly payment for all such loans not
exceed the result described in subsection (a)(2)(B) divided
by 12;
``(2) the holder of such a loan shall apply the borrower's
monthly payment under this subsection first toward interest
due on the loan and then toward the principal of the loan;
``(3) any interest due and not paid under paragraph (2)
shall be capitalized;
``(4) any principal due and not paid under paragraph (2)
shall be deferred;
``(5) the amount of time the borrower makes monthly
payments under paragraph (1) may exceed 10 years;
``(6) if the borrower no longer has a partial financial
hardship or no longer wishes to continue the election under
this subsection, then--
``(A) the maximum monthly payment required to be paid for
all loans made to the borrower under part B or D (other than
an excepted PLUS loan) shall not exceed the monthly amount
calculated under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or 455(d)(1)(A) when
the borrower first made the election described in this
subsection; and
``(B) the amount of time the borrower is permitted to repay
such loans may exceed 10 years;
``(7) the Secretary shall repay or cancel any outstanding
balance of principal and interest due on all loans made under
part B or D (other than a loan under section 428B or a
Federal Direct PLUS Loan) to a borrower who--
``(A) is in deferment due to an economic hardship described
in section 435(o) for a period of time prescribed by the
Secretary, not to exceed 20 years; or
[[Page H7523]]
``(B)(i) makes the election to participate in income-based
repayment under paragraph (1); and
``(ii) for a period of time prescribed by the Secretary,
not to exceed 20 years (including any period during which the
borrower is in deferment due to an economic hardship
described in section 435(o)), meets 1 or more of the
following requirements:
``(I) has made reduced monthly payments under paragraph
(1);
``(II) has made monthly payments of not less than the
monthly amount calculated under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or
455(d)(1)(A) when the borrower first made the election
described in this subsection;
``(III) has made payments under a standard repayment plan
under section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or 455(d)(1)(A);
``(IV) has made payments under an income-contingent
repayment plan under section 455(d)(1)(D); and
``(8) a borrower who is repaying a loan made under this
part pursuant to income-based repayment may elect, at any
time, to terminate repayment pursuant to income-based
repayment and repay such loan under the standard repayment
plan.''.
(b) Conforming ICR Amendment.--Section 455(d)(1)(D) (20
U.S.C. 1087e(d)(1)(D)) is amended by inserting ``made on
behalf of a dependent student'' after ``PLUS loan''.
SEC. 134. DEFINITION OF ECONOMIC HARDSHIP.
Section 435(o) (20 U.S.C. 1085(o)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)(ii)--
(i) by striking ``100 percent of the poverty line for a
family of 2'' and inserting ``150 percent of the poverty line
applicable to the borrower's family size''; and
(ii) by inserting ``or'' after the semicolon;
(B) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(C) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B);
and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``(1)(C)'' and inserting
``(1)(B)''.
SEC. 135. DEFERRALS.
(a) FISL.--Section 427(a)(2)(C)(iii) (20 U.S.C.
1077(a)(2)(C)(iii)) is amended by striking ``not in excess of
3 years''.
(b) Interest Subsidies.--Section 428(b)(1)(M)(iv) (20
U.S.C. 1078(b)(1)(M)(iv)) is amended by striking ``not in
excess of 3 years''.
(c) Direct Loans.--Section 455(f)(2)(D) (20 U.S.C.
1087e(f)(2)(D)) is amended by striking ``not in excess of 3
years''.
(d) Perkins.--Section 464(c)(2)(A)(iv) (20 U.S.C.
1087dd(c)(2)(A)(iv)) is amended by striking ``not in excess
of 3 years''.
SEC. 136. MAXIMUM REPAYMENT PERIOD.
(a) In General.--Section 455(e) (20 U.S.C. 1087e(e)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(9) Maximum repayment period.--In calculating the
extended period of time for which an income-contingent
repayment plan under this subsection may be in effect for a
borrower, the Secretary shall include all time periods during
which a borrower of loans under part B, part D, or part E--
``(A) is not in default on any loan that is included in the
income-contingent repayment plan; and
``(B)(i) is in deferment due to an economic hardship
described in section 435(o);
``(ii) makes monthly payments under paragraph (1) or (6) of
section 493C(b); or
``(iii) makes payments under a standard repayment plan
described in section 428(b)(9)(A)(i) or subsection
(d)(1)(A).''.
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 455(d)(1)(C) (20 U.S.C.
1087e(d)(1)(C)) is amended by striking ``428(b)(9)(A)(v)''
and inserting ``428(b)(9)(A)(iv)''.
SEC. 137. DEFERRAL OF LOAN REPAYMENT FOLLOWING ACTIVE DUTY.
Part G of title IV is amended by inserting after section
484B (20 U.S.C. 1091b) the following new section:
``SEC. 484C. DEFERRAL OF LOAN REPAYMENT FOLLOWING ACTIVE
DUTY.
``(a) Deferral of Loan Repayment Following Active Duty.--In
addition to any deferral of repayment of a loan made under
this title pursuant to section 428(b)(1)(M)(iii),
455(f)(2)(C), or 464(c)(2)(A)(ii), a borrower of a loan under
this title who is a member of the National Guard or other
reserve component of the Armed Forces of the United States,
or a member of such Armed Forces in a retired status, is
called or ordered to active duty, and is currently enrolled,
or was enrolled within six months prior to the activation, in
a program of instruction at an eligible institution, shall be
eligible for a deferment during the 13 months following the
conclusion of such service, except that a deferment under
this subsection shall expire upon the borrower's return to
enrolled student status.
``(b) Active Duty.--Notwithstanding section 481(d), in this
section, the term `active duty' has the meaning given such
term in section 101(d)(1) of title 10, United States Code,
except that such term--
``(1) does not include active duty for training or
attendance at a service school; but
``(2) includes, in the case of members of the National
Guard, active State duty.''.
PART D--SUSTAINING THE PERKINS LOAN PROGRAM
SEC. 141. FEDERAL PERKINS LOANS.
Section 461(b) (20 U.S.C. 1087aa(b)) is amended by adding
at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(3) In addition to any amounts appropriated pursuant to
paragraph (1) or (2) of this subsection, there shall be
available to the Secretary for contributions to student loan
funds established under part E, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, $100,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008
through 2012. The sum of the amount made available under this
subsection for any such fiscal year, plus the amount so
appropriated for such fiscal year, shall, for purposes of
allocations under section 462, be treated as the amount
appropriated pursuant to section 461(b) for such fiscal year.
``(4) The authority to make contributions to student loan
funds under this part shall expire at the end of fiscal year
2012.''.
TITLE II--REDUCING THE COST OF COLLEGE
SEC. 201. CONSUMER INFORMATION AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY IN
HIGHER EDUCATION.
Section 131 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1015) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 131. CONSUMER INFORMATION AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY IN
HIGHER EDUCATION.
``(a) College Opportunity On-Line (COOL) Website Re-Design
Process.--In carrying out this section, the Commissioner of
Education Statistics--
``(1) shall identify the data elements related to college
costs that are of greatest importance to prospective
students, enrolled students, and their families, paying
particular attention to low-income, non-traditional student
populations, and first-generation college students;
``(2) shall convene a group of individuals with expertise
in the informational needs of prospective college students
and parents to--
``(A) determine the relevance of particular data elements
to prospective students, enrolled students, and families
based upon the results of opinion research; and
``(B) make recommendations regarding the inclusion of
specific data items and the most effective and least
burdensome methods of collecting and reporting useful data
from institutions of higher education; and
``(3) shall ensure that the redesigned COOL website--
``(A) uses, to the extent practicable, data elements
currently provided by institutions of higher education to the
Secretary;
``(B) includes clear and uniform information determined to
be relevant to prospective students, enrolled students, and
families;
``(C) provides comparable information, by ensuring that
information is based on accepted criteria and common
definitions;
``(D) includes a sorting function that permits users to
customize their search for and comparison of institutions of
higher education based on the information identified through
the process as prescribed in paragraph (1) as being of
greatest relevance to choosing an institution of higher
education.
``(b) Data Collection.--
``(1) Data system.--The Commissioner of Education
Statistics shall continue to redesign the relevant parts of
the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System to include
additional data as required by this section and to continue
to improve the usefulness and timeliness of data collected by
such System in order to inform consumers about institutions
of higher education.
``(2) College consumer profile.--The Secretary shall
continue to publish on the COOL website, for each academic
year and in accordance with standard definitions developed by
the Commissioner of Education Statistics (including
definitions developed under section 131(a)(3)(A) as in effect
on the day before the date of enactment of the College Cost
Reduction Act of 2007), from at least all institutions of
higher education participating in programs under title IV the
following information:
``(A) The tuition and fees charged for a first-time, full-
time undergraduate student.
``(B) The room and board charges for a first-time, full-
time undergraduate student.
``(C) The cost of attendance for a first-time, full-time
undergraduate student, consistent with the provisions of
section 472.
``(D) The average amount of financial assistance (including
grant assistance) received by a first-year, full-time
undergraduate student.
``(E) The number and percentage of first-time, full-time
undergraduate students receiving financial assistance
(including grant assistance) described in each clause of
subparagraph (D).
``(F) Student enrollment information, including information
on the number and percentage of full-time and part-time
students, and the number and percentage of resident and non-
resident students.
``(G) Faculty-to-student ratios.
``(H) The total number of faculty and the percentage of
faculty who are full-time employees of the institution and
the percentage who are part-time.
``(I) Graduation rates calculated pursuant to section
485(a)(1)(L), including rates disaggregated by gender, by
each major racial and ethnic subgroup, and by income status,
as measured by receipt of Federal Pell Grants or Federal
subsidized student loans.
``(J) A link to the institution of higher education with
information of interest to students including mission,
accreditation, student services (including services for
students with disabilities), transfer of credit policies, any
articulation agreements entered into by the institution.
``(K) The college affordability information elements
specified in subsection (d).
``(c) Information to the Public.--The Secretary shall work
with public and private entities to promote broad public
awareness, particularly among middle and high school students
and their families, of the information made available under
this section, including by distribution to students who
participate in or receive benefits from means-tested
federally funded education programs and other Federal
programs determined by the Secretary.
``(d) College Affordability Information Elements.--The
college affordability information elements required by
subsection (b)(2)(K) shall include, for each institution
submitting data--
``(1) the sticker price of the institution for the 5 most
recent academic years; and
[[Page H7524]]
``(2) the net tuition of the institution for the most
recent academic year for which data are available.
``(e) Outcomes and Actions.--
``(1) Response from institution.--Effective on June 30,
2011, an institution that increases its sticker price at a
percentage rate for any 3-year interval ending on or after
that date that exceeds two times the rate of change in the
higher education price index over the same time period shall
provide a report to the Secretary. Such report shall be
published by the Secretary on the COOL website, and shall
include--
``(A) a description of the factors contributing to the
increase in the institution's costs and in the tuition and
fees charged to students; and
``(B) if determinations of tuition and fee increases are
not within the exclusive control of the institution, a
description of the agency or instrumentality of State
government or other entity that participates in such
determinations and the authority exercised by such agency,
instrumentality, or entity.
``(2) Consequences for 2-year continuation of failure.--If
the Secretary determines that an institution that is subject
to paragraph (1) has failed to reduce the subsequent increase
in sticker price to equal to or below two times the rate of
change in the higher education price index for 2 consecutive
academic years subsequent to the 3-year interval used under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall place the institution on
affordability alert status.
``(3) Exemptions.--Notwithstanding paragraph (2), an
institution shall not be placed on affordability alert status
if, for any 3-year interval for which sticker prices are
computed under paragraph (1)--
``(A) with respect the class of institutions described in
paragraph (5) to which the institution belongs, the sticker
price of the institution is in the lowest quartile of
institutions within such class, as determined by the
Secretary, during the last year of such 3-year interval; or
``(B) the institution has a percentage change in its
sticker price computed under paragraph (1) that exceeds two
times the rate of change in the higher education price index
over the same time period, but the dollar amount of the
sticker price increase is less than $500.
``(4) Information to state agencies.--Any institution that
reports under paragraph (1)(B) that an agency or
instrumentality of State government or other entity
participates in the determinations of tuition and fee
increases shall, prior to submitting any information to the
Secretary under this subsection, submit such information to,
and request the comments and input of, such agency,
instrumentality, or entity. With respect to any such
institution, the Secretary shall provide a copy of any
communication by the Secretary with that institution to such
agency, instrumentality, or entity.
``(5) Classes of institutions.--For purposes of this
subsection, the classes of institutions shall be those
sectors used by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System, based on whether the institution is public, nonprofit
private, or for-profit private, and whether the institution
has a 4-year, 2-year, or less than 2-year program of
instruction.
``(6) Data rejection.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed as allowing the Secretary to reject the data
submitted by an individual institution of higher education.
``(f) Fines.--In addition to actions authorized in section
487(c), the Secretary may impose a fine in an amount not to
exceed $25,000 on an institution of higher education for
failing to provide the information required by this section
in a timely and accurate manner, or for failing to otherwise
cooperate with the National Center for Education Statistics
regarding efforts to obtain data under subsection (c) and
pursuant to the program participation agreement entered into
under section 487.
``(g) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
``(h) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
``(1) Net tuition.--The term `net tuition' means the
average tuition and fees charged to a full-time undergraduate
student by an institution of higher education for any
academic year, minus the average grant amount received by
such a student for such academic year.
``(2) Sticker price.--The term `sticker price' means the
average published tuition and fees charged to a first-time,
full-time, undergraduate student by an institution of higher
education for any academic year.
``(3) Higher education price index.--The term `higher
education price index' means a statistical measure of change
over time in the prices of a fixed market basket of goods and
services purchased by colleges and universities through
current fund educational and general expenditures (excluding
expenditures for research), as developed by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics.''.
SEC. 202. COOPERATIVE EDUCATION REWARDS FOR INSTITUTIONS THAT
RESTRAIN TUITION INCREASES.
The Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.)
is amended by adding at the end the following title:
``TITLE VIII--RESTRAINING TUITION INCREASES
``PART A--COOPERATIVE EDUCATION
``SEC. 801. DEFINITION OF COOPERATIVE EDUCATION.
``For the purpose of this title the term `cooperative
education' means the provision of alternating or parallel
periods of academic study and public or private employment in
order to give students work experiences related to their
academic or occupational objectives and an opportunity to
earn the funds necessary for continuing and completing their
education.
``SEC. 802. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS; RESERVATIONS.
``(a) Appropriations.--There shall be available to the
Secretary to carry out this title from funds not otherwise
appropriated $15,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008
through 2012.
``(b) Reservations.--Of the amount appropriated for each
such fiscal year--
``(1) not less than 50 percent shall be available for
carrying out grants to institutions of higher education and
combinations of such institutions described in section
803(a)(1)(A) for cooperative education under section 803;
``(2) not less than 25 percent shall be available for
carrying out grants to institutions of higher education
described in section 803(a)(1)(B) for cooperative education
under section 803;
``(3) not more than 11 percent shall be available for
demonstration projects under paragraph (1) of section 804(a);
``(4) not more than 11 percent shall be available for
training and resource centers under paragraph (2) of section
804(a); and
``(5) not more than 3 percent shall be available for
research under paragraph (3) of section 804(a).
``(c) Availability of Appropriations.--Appropriations under
this title shall not be available for the payment of
compensation of students for employment by employers under
arrangements pursuant to this title.
``(d) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this title shall
expire at the end of fiscal year 2012.
``SEC. 803. GRANTS FOR COOPERATIVE EDUCATION.
``(a) Grants Authorized.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized--
``(A) from the amount available under section 802(b)(1) in
each fiscal year and in accordance with the provisions of
this title, to make grants to institutions of higher
education or combinations of such institutions that have not
previously received a grant under this paragraph to pay the
Federal share of the cost of planning, establishing,
expanding, or carrying out programs of cooperative education
by such institutions or combinations of institutions; and
``(B) from the amount available under section 802(b)(2) in
each fiscal year and in accordance with the provisions of
this title, to make grants to institutions of higher
education that are operating an existing cooperative
education program (as determined by the Secretary) to pay the
cost of planning, establishing, expanding, or carrying out
programs of cooperative education by such institutions.
``(2) Program requirement.--Cooperative education programs
assisted under this section shall provide alternating or
parallel periods of academic study and of public or private
employment, giving students work experience related to their
academic or occupational objectives and the opportunity to
earn the funds necessary for continuing and completing their
education.
``(3) Amount of grants.--
``(A) The amount of each grant awarded pursuant to
paragraph (1)(A) to any institution of higher education or
combination of such institutions in any fiscal year shall not
exceed $500,000.
``(B)(i) Except as provided in clauses (ii) and (iii), the
Secretary shall award grants in each fiscal year to each
institution of higher education described in paragraph (1)(B)
that has an application approved under subsection (b) in an
amount which bears the same ratio to the amount reserved
pursuant to section 802(b)(2) for such fiscal year as the
number of unduplicated students placed in cooperative
education jobs during the preceding fiscal year (other than
cooperative education jobs under section 804 and as
determined by the Secretary) by such institution of higher
education bears to the total number of all such students
placed in such jobs during the preceding fiscal year by all
such institutions.
``(ii) No institution of higher education shall receive a
grant pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) in any fiscal year in an
amount which exceeds 25 percent of such institution's
cooperative education program's personnel and operating
budget for the preceding fiscal year.
``(iii) The minimum annual grant amount which an
institution of higher education is eligible to receive under
paragraph (1)(B) is $1,000 and the maximum annual grant
amount is $75,000.
``(4) Limitation.--The Secretary shall not award grants
pursuant to paragraphs (1)(A) and (1)(B) to the same
institution of higher education or combination of such
institution in any one fiscal year.
``(5) Uses.--Grants under paragraph (1)(B) shall be used
exclusively--
``(A) to expand the quality and participation of a
cooperative education program;
``(B) for outreach in new curricular areas; and
``(C) for outreach to potential participants including
underrepresented and nontraditional populations.
``(b) Applications.--Each institution of higher education
or combination of such institutions desiring to receive a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time and in such manner as the Secretary
shall prescribe. Each such application shall--
``(1) set forth the program or activities for which a grant
is authorized under this section;
``(2) specify each portion of such program or activities
which will be performed by a nonprofit organization or
institution other than the applicant, and the compensation to
be paid for such performance;
``(3) provide that the applicant will expend during such
fiscal year for the purpose of such program or activities not
less than the amount expended for such purpose during the
previous fiscal year;
``(4) describe the plans which the applicant will carry out
to assure, and contain a formal statement of the
institution's commitment which
[[Page H7525]]
assures, that the applicant will continue the cooperative
education program beyond the 5-year period of Federal
assistance described in subsection (c)(1) at a level which is
not less than the total amount expended for such program
during the first year such program was assisted under this
section;
``(5) provide that, in the case of an institution of higher
education that provides a 2-year program which is acceptable
for full credit toward a bachelor's degree, the cooperative
education program will be available to students who are
certificate or associate degree candidates and who carry at
least one-half the normal full-time academic workload;
``(6) provide that the applicant will--
``(A) for each fiscal year for which the applicant receives
a grant, make such reports with respect to the impact of the
cooperative education program in the previous fiscal year as
may be essential to ensure that the applicant is complying
with the provisions of this section, including--
``(i) the number of unduplicated student applicants in the
cooperative education program;
``(ii) the number of unduplicated students placed in
cooperative education jobs;
``(iii) the number of employers who have hired cooperative
education students;
``(iv) the average income for students derived from working
in cooperative education jobs; and
``(v) the increase or decrease in the number of
unduplicated students placed in cooperative education jobs in
each fiscal year compared to the previous fiscal year; and
``(B) keep such records as are essential to ensure that the
applicant is complying with the provisions of this title,
including the notation of cooperative education employment on
the student's transcript;
``(7) describe the extent to which programs in the academic
discipline for which the application is made have had a
favorable reception by public and private sector employers;
``(8) describe the extent to which the institution is
committed to extending cooperative education on an
institution-wide basis for all students who can benefit;
``(9) describe the plans that the applicant will carry out
to evaluate the applicant's cooperative education program at
the end of the grant period;
``(10) provide for such fiscal control and fund accounting
procedures as may be necessary to assure proper disbursement
of, and accounting for, Federal funds paid to the applicant
under this title;
``(11) demonstrate a commitment to serving all underserved
populations; and
``(12) include such other information as is essential to
carry out the provisions of this title.
``(c) Duration of Grants; Federal Share.--
``(1) Duration of grants.--No individual institution of
higher education may receive, individually or as a
participant in a combination of such institutions--
``(A) a grant pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(A) for more
than 5 fiscal years; or
``(B) a grant pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(B) for more
than 5 fiscal years.
``(2) Federal share.--The Federal share of a grant under
section 803(a)(1)(A) may not exceed--
``(A) 85 percent of the cost of carrying out the program or
activities described in the application in the first year the
applicant receives a grant under this section;
``(B) 70 percent of such cost in the second such year;
``(C) 55 percent of such cost in the third such year;
``(D) 40 percent of such cost in the fourth such year; and
``(E) 25 percent of such cost in the fifth such year.
``(3) Special rule.--Any provision of law to the contrary
notwithstanding, the Secretary shall not waive the provisions
of this subsection.
``(d) Maintenance of Effort.--If the Secretary determines
that a recipient of funds under this section has failed to
maintain the fiscal effort described in subsection (b)(3),
then the Secretary may elect not to make grant payments under
this section to such recipient.
``SEC. 804. DEMONSTRATION AND INNOVATION PROJECTS; TRAINING
AND RESOURCE CENTERS; AND RESEARCH.
``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary is authorized, in
accordance with the provisions of this section, to make
grants and enter into contracts--
``(1) from the amounts available in each fiscal year under
section 802(b)(3), for the conduct of demonstration projects
designed to demonstrate or determine the feasibility or value
of innovative methods of cooperative education;
``(2) from the amounts available in each fiscal year under
section 802(b)(4), for the conduct of training and resource
centers designed to--
``(A) train personnel in the field of cooperative
education;
``(B) improve materials used in cooperative education
programs if such improvement is conducted in conjunction with
other activities described in this paragraph;
``(C) furnish technical assistance to institutions of
higher education to increase the potential of the institution
to continue to conduct a cooperative education program
without Federal assistance;
``(D) encourage model cooperative education programs which
furnish education and training in occupations in which there
is a national need;
``(E) support partnerships under which an institution
carrying out a comprehensive cooperative education program
joins with one or more institutions of higher education in
order to--
``(i) assist the institutions other than the comprehensive
cooperative education institution to develop and expand an
existing program of cooperative education; or
``(ii) establish and improve or expand comprehensive
cooperative education programs; and
``(F) encourage model cooperative education programs in the
fields of science and mathematics for women and minorities
who are underrepresented in such fields; and
``(3) from the amounts available in each fiscal year under
section 802(b)(5), for the conduct of research relating to
cooperative education.
``(b) Administrative Provision.--
``(1) In general.--To carry out this section, the Secretary
may--
``(A) make grants to or contracts with institutions of
higher education, or combinations of such institutions; and
``(B) make grants to or contracts with other public or
private nonprofit agencies or organizations, whenever such
grants or contracts will make an especially significant
contribution to attaining the objectives of this section.
``(2) Limitation.--
``(A) The Secretary may not use more than 3 percent of the
amount appropriated to carry out this section in each fiscal
year to make grants or enter into contracts described in
paragraph (1)(A).
``(B) The Secretary may use not more than 3 percent of the
amount appropriated to carry out this section in each fiscal
year to make grants or enter into contracts described in
paragraph (1)(B).
``(c) Supplement Not Supplant.--A recipient of a grant or
contract under this section may use the funds provided only
to supplement and, to the extent possible, increase the level
of funds that would, in the absence of such funds, be made
available from non-Federal sources to carry out the
activities supported by such grant or contract, and in no
case to supplant such funds from non-Federal sources.
``PART B--LOW TUITION
``SEC. 811. INCENTIVES AND REWARDS FOR LOW TUITION.
``(a) Rewards for Low Tuition.--
``(1) Competitive grants.--The Secretary shall award grants
on a competitive basis to institutions of higher education
that, for academic year 2008-2009 or any succeeding academic
year, have an annual net tuition increase (expressed as a
percentage) for the most recent academic year for which
satisfactory data is available that is equal to or less than
the percentage change in the higher education price index for
such academic year.
``(2) Use of funds.--Funds awarded to an institution of
higher education under paragraph (1) shall be distributed by
the institution in the form of need-based grant aid to
students who are eligible for Federal Pell Grants, except
that no student shall receive an amount under this section
that would cause the amount of total financial aid received
by such student to exceed the cost of attendance of the
institution.
``(b) Rewards for Guaranteed Tuition.--
``(1) Bonus.--For each institution of higher education that
the Secretary of Education determines complies with the
requirements of paragraph (2) or (3) of this subsection, the
Secretary shall provide to such institution a bonus amount.
Such institution shall award the bonus amount first to
students who are eligible for Federal Pell Grants who were in
attendance at the institution during the award year that such
institution satisfied the eligibility criteria for
maintaining low tuition and fees, then to students who are
eligible for Federal Pell Grants who were not in attendance
at the institution during such award year, in the form of
need-based aid.
``(2) 4-year institutions.--An institution of higher
education that provides a program of instruction for which it
awards a bachelor's degree complies with the requirements of
this paragraph if such institution guarantees that for any
academic year beginning on or after July 1, 2008, and for
each of the 4 succeeding continuous academic years, the net
tuition charged to an undergraduate student will not exceed--
``(A) the amount that the student was charged for an
academic year at the time he or she first enrolled in the
institution of higher education, plus
``(B) the product of the percentage increase in the higher
education price index for the prior academic year, or the
most recent prior academic year for which data is available,
multiplied by the amount determined under subparagraph (A).
``(3) Less-than 4-year institutions.--An institution of
higher education that does not provide a program of
instruction for which it awards a bachelor's degree complies
with the requirements of this paragraph if such institution
guarantees that for any academic year (or the equivalent)
beginning on or after July 1, 2008, and for each of the 1.5
succeeding continuous academic years, the net tuition charged
to an undergraduate student will not exceed--
``(A) the amount that the student was charged for an
academic year at the time he or she first enrolled in the
institution of higher education, plus
``(B) the product of the percentage increase in the higher
education price index for the prior academic year, or the
most recent prior academic year for which data is available,
multiplied by the amount determined under subparagraph (A).
``(c) Maintaining Affordable Tuition.--
``(1) Institution reports.--If an institution of higher
education has an increase in annual net tuition (expressed as
a percentage), for the most recent academic year for which
satisfactory data is available, that is greater than the
percentage increase in the higher education price index for
such academic year, the institution is required to submit to
the Secretary the following information, within 6 months of
such determination--
[[Page H7526]]
``(A) a report on the factors contributing to the increase
in the institution's costs and the increase in net tuition
and fees charged to students, including identification of the
major areas in the institution's budget with the greatest
cost increases;
``(B) the institution's 3 most recent Form 990s submitted
to the Internal Revenue Service, as required under section
6033 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
``(C) a description of the major areas of expenditures in
the institution's budget with the greatest increase for such
academic year; and
``(D) voluntary actions being taken by the institution to
reduce net tuition.
``(2) Report to congress.--The Secretary shall compile the
information submitted under this subsection and shall provide
to the relevant authorizing committees an annual report
relating to such information.
``(d) Priority.--In awarding incentives and rewards under
this section, the Secretary shall give priority to
institutions of higher education with the lowest annual net
tuition increase for the most recent academic year for which
satisfactory data is available, when compared with other
institutions of higher education with annual net tuition
increases that are equal to or less than the higher education
price index for such academic year.
``(e) Exemptions.--An institution shall still be eligible
to receive rewards under subsections (a) and (b), and will
not be penalized under subsection (c) if, for any 2-year
interval for which net tuition is computed under such
subsections--
``(1) with respect to the class of institutions described
in section 131(d)(5) to which the institution belongs, the
net tuition of the institution is in the lowest quartile of
institutions within such class, as determined by the
Secretary, during the last year of such 2-year interval; or
``(2) the institution has a percentage change in its net
tuition computed under subsection (a) or (c) that exceeds the
rate of change in the higher education price index (as
defined in section 401B(d)) over the same time period, but
the dollar amount of the net tuition increase is less than
$500.
``(f) Definitions.--
``(1) Net tuition.--The term `net tuition' has the same
meaning as provided in section 131(h).
``(2) Higher education price index.--The term `higher
education price index' has the same meaning as provided in
section 131(h).
``(g) Funding.--There shall be available to the Secretary
to carry out this section, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, $15,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008
through 2012.
``(h) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section
shall expire at the end of fiscal year 2012.''.
TITLE III--ENSURING A HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHER IN EVERY CLASSROOM
PART A--TEACH GRANTS
SEC. 301. TEACH GRANTS.
Part A of title IV (20 U.S.C. 1070a et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subpart:
``Subpart 9--TEACH Grants
``SEC. 420L. PROGRAM ESTABLISHED.
``(a) Program Authority.--
``(1) Payments required.--The Secretary shall pay to each
eligible institution such sums as may be necessary to pay to
each eligible student (defined in accordance with section
484) who files an application and agreement in accordance
with section 420M, and who qualifies--
``(A) under paragraph (2) of section 420M(a), a TEACH Grant
in the amount of $4,000 for each academic year during which
that student is in attendance at the institution; and
``(B) under paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 420M(a), a
Bonus TEACH Grant in the amount of $500 (in addition to the
amount of the TEACH Grant under subparagraph (A)) for each
academic year during which that student so qualifies.
``(2) Reference.--Grants made under--
``(A) paragraph (1)(A) shall be known as `Teacher Education
Assistance for College and Higher Education Grants' or `TEACH
Grants'; and
``(B) paragraph (1)(B) shall be known as Bonus TEACH
Grants.
``(b) Payment Methodology.--
``(1) Prepayment.--Not less than 85 percent of any funds
provided to an institution under subsection (a) shall be
advanced to eligible institutions prior to the start of each
payment period and shall be based upon an amount requested by
the institution as needed to pay eligible students until such
time as the Secretary determines and publishes in the Federal
Register with an opportunity for comment, an alternative
payment system that provides payments to institutions in an
accurate and timely manner, except that this sentence shall
not be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary to
place an institution on a reimbursement system of payment.
``(2) Direct payment.--Nothing in this section shall be
interpreted to prohibit the Secretary from paying directly to
students, in advance of the beginning of the academic term,
an amount for which they are eligible, in cases where the
eligible institution elects not to participate in the
disbursement system required by paragraph (1).
``(3) Distribution of grants to students.--Payments under
this subpart shall be made, in accordance with regulations
promulgated by the Secretary for such purpose, in such manner
as will best accomplish the purposes of this subpart. Any
disbursement allowed to be made by crediting the student's
account shall be limited to tuition and fees and, in the case
of institutionally-owned housing, room and board. The student
may elect to have the institution provide other such goods
and services by crediting the student's account.
``(c) Reductions in Amount.--
``(1) Part-time students.--In any case where a student
attends an institution of higher education on less than a
full-time basis (including a student who attends an
institution of higher education on less than a half-time
basis) during any academic year, the amount of a grant under
this subpart for which that student is eligible shall be
reduced in proportion to the degree to which that student is
not attending on a full-time basis, in accordance with a
schedule of reductions established by the Secretary for the
purposes of this subpart, computed in accordance with this
subpart. Such schedule of reductions shall be established by
regulation and published in the Federal Register in
accordance with section 482 of this Act.
``(2) No exceeding cost.--The amount of a grant awarded
under this subpart, in combination with Federal assistance
and other student assistance, shall not exceed the cost of
attendance (as defined in section 472) at the institution at
which that student is in attendance. If, with respect to any
student, it is determined that the amount of a TEACH Grant or
a Bonus TEACH Grant exceeds the cost of attendance for that
year, the amount of the TEACH Grant or Bonus TEACH Grant,
respectively, shall be reduced until such grant does not
exceed the cost of attendance at such institution.
``(d) Period of Eligibility for Grants.--
``(1) Undergraduate and post-baccalaureate students.--The
period during which an undergraduate or post-baccalaureate
student may receive grants under this subpart shall be the
period required for the completion of the first undergraduate
baccalaureate or post-baccalaureate course of study being
pursued by that student at the institution at which the
student is in attendance except that--
``(A) any period during which the student is enrolled in a
noncredit or remedial course of study as defined in paragraph
(3) shall not be counted for the purpose of this paragraph;
and
``(B) the total amount that a student may receive under
this subpart for undergraduate or post-baccalaureate study
shall not exceed $16,000 with respect to a student who
receives only TEACH Grants, and $18,000 with respect to a
student who receives TEACH Grants and Bonus TEACH Grants.
``(2) Graduate students.--The period during which a
graduate student may receive grants under this subpart shall
be the period required for the completion of a master's
degree course of study being pursued by that student at the
institution at which the student is in attendance, except
that the total amount that a student may receive under this
subpart for graduate study shall not exceed $8,000 with
respect to a student who receives only TEACH Grants, and
$10,000 with respect to a student who receives TEACH Grants
and Bonus TEACH Grants.
``(3) Remedial course; study abroad.--Nothing in this
section shall exclude from eligibility courses of study which
are noncredit or remedial in nature (including courses in
English language acquisition) which are determined by the
institution to be necessary to help the student be prepared
for the pursuit of a first undergraduate baccalaureate or
post-baccalaureate degree or certificate or, in the case of
courses in English language instruction, to be necessary to
enable the student to utilize already existing knowledge,
training, or skills. Nothing in this section shall exclude
from eligibility programs of study abroad that are approved
for credit by the home institution at which the student is
enrolled.
``SEC. 420M. ELIGIBILITY; APPLICATIONS.
``(a) Applications; Demonstration of Eligibility.--
``(1) Filing required.--The Secretary shall from time to
time set dates by which students shall file applications for
grants under this subpart. Each student desiring a grant
under this subpart for any year shall file an application
containing such information and assurances as the Secretary
may deem necessary to enable the Secretary to carry out the
functions and responsibilities of this subpart.
``(2) Demonstration of teach grant eligibility.--Each
application submitted under paragraph (1) for a TEACH Grant
shall contain such information as is necessary to demonstrate
that--
``(A) if the applicant is an enrolled student--
``(i) the student is an eligible student for purposes of
section 484;
``(ii) the student--
``(I) has a grade point average that is determined, under
standards prescribed by the Secretary, to be comparable to a
3.25 average on a zero to 4.0 scale, except that, if the
student is in the first year of a program of undergraduate
education, such grade point average shall be determined on
the basis of the student's cumulative high school grade point
average; or
``(II) displayed high academic aptitude by receiving a
score above the 75th percentile on at least one of the
batteries in an undergraduate, post-baccalaureate, or
graduate school admissions test; and
``(iii) the student is completing coursework and other
requirements necessary to begin a career in teaching, or
plans to complete such coursework and requirements prior to
graduating; or
``(B) if the applicant is a current or prospective teacher
applying for a grant to obtain a graduate degree--
``(i) the applicant is a teacher or a retiree from another
occupation with expertise in a field in which there is a
shortage of teachers, such as math, science, special
education, English language acquisition, or another high-need
subject; or
``(ii) the applicant is or was a teacher who is using high-
quality alternative certification routes, such as Teach for
America, to get certified.
[[Page H7527]]
``(3) Demonstration of bonus teach grant eligibility.--Each
application submitted under paragraph (1) for a Bonus TEACH
Grant shall contain such information as is necessary to
demonstrate that the applicant is--
``(A) eligible for, and has applied for, a TEACH Grant; and
``(B) a student enrolled in a qualified teacher preparation
program, as defined in section 420N.
``(b) Agreements To Serve.--Each application under
subsection (a) shall contain or be accompanied by an
agreement by the applicant that--
``(1) the applicant will--
``(A) serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less
than 4 academic years within 8 years after completing the
course of study for which the applicant received a TEACH
Grant under this subpart;
``(B) teach in a school described in section 465(a)(2)(A);
``(C) with respect to an applicant for--
``(i) TEACH Grants, teach in any of the following fields:
mathematics, science, a foreign language, bilingual
education, or special education, or as a reading specialist,
or another field documented as high-need by the Federal
Government, State government, or local education agency and
approved by the Secretary; or
``(ii) TEACH Grants and Bonus TEACH Grants, teach
mathematics, science, or a science-related field;
``(D) submit evidence of such employment in the form of a
certification by the chief administrative officer of the
school upon completion of each year of such service; and
``(E) comply with the requirements for being a highly
qualified teacher as defined in section 9101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
``(2) in the event that the applicant is determined to have
failed or refused to carry out such service obligation, the
sum of the amounts of any TEACH Grants and Bonus TEACH Grants
received by such applicant will be treated as a loan and
collected from the applicant in accordance with subsection
(c) and the regulations thereunder.
``(c) Repayment for Failure To Complete Service.--In the
event that any recipient of a grant under this subpart fails
or refuses to comply with the service obligation in the
agreement under subsection (b), the sum of the amounts of any
TEACH Grants and Bonus TEACH Grants received by such
recipient shall be treated as a Direct Loan under part D of
title IV, and shall be subject to repayment, together with
interest thereon accruing after the period of service, in
accordance with terms and conditions specified by the
Secretary in regulations under this subpart.
``SEC. 420N. DEFINITIONS.
``For the purposes of this subpart:
``(1) Eligible institution.--The term `eligible
institution' means an institution of higher education, as
defined in section 102, that the Secretary determines--
``(A) provides high quality teacher preparation and
professional development services, including extensive
clinical experience as a part of pre-service preparation;
``(B) is financially sound;
``(C) provides pedagogical course work, or assistance in
the provision of such coursework, including the monitoring of
student performance, and formal instruction related to the
theory and practices of teaching; and
``(D) provides supervision and support services to
teachers, or assistance in the provision of such services,
including mentoring focused on developing effective teaching
skills and strategies.
``(2) Qualified teacher preparation program.--The term
`qualified teacher preparation program' means a program for
students and teachers described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of
section 420M(a)(2) (referred to jointly in this paragraph as
`teacher candidates') that--
``(A) recruits and prepares teacher candidates who major in
science, technology fields, special education, foreign
language, engineering, or mathematics disciplines to become
certified as elementary and secondary teachers in those
disciplines, special education teachers, or teachers of
English Language Learners, with the goals of improving
teacher knowledge and effectiveness and increasing elementary
and secondary student academic achievement;
``(B) is implemented by an institution of higher education
in partnership with high-need local educational agencies and
schools;
``(C) offers a baccalaureate degree, post-baccalaureate
teacher credential, or graduate degree with a concurrent
teacher certification to teacher candidates;
``(D) is implemented in coordination with the faculty of
the relevant departments of the institution of higher
education;
``(E) utilizes experienced teachers who have a demonstrated
record of success in teaching underserved students to
instruct teacher candidates in the disciplines described in
subparagraph (A);
``(F) provides teacher candidates with--
``(i) support services, including mentoring by experienced
teachers who have a demonstrated record of success in
teaching underserved students;
``(ii) exposure to, and field experience in, the classroom
within the first year of entering the qualified teacher
preparation program; and
``(iii) other related support practices while the teacher
candidates are participating in the program, and after such
candidates graduate from the institution of higher education
and are employed as teachers;
``(G) participates in partnerships which include the
institution of higher education and local educational
agencies and charter districts to provide opportunities for
teacher candidate field work;
``(H) focuses on increasing the number of teachers in the
disciplines described in subparagraph (A); and
``(I) encourages individuals from underrepresented
populations to enter into the teaching profession.
``(3) Post-baccalaureate.--The term `post-baccalaureate'
means a program of instruction that does not lead to a
graduate degree, and that consists of courses required by a
State in order for the student to receive a professional
certification or licensing credential that is required for
employment as a teacher in an elementary school or secondary
school in that State, except that such term shall not include
any program of instruction offered by an institution of
higher education that offers a baccalaureate degree in
education.
``SEC. 420O. PROGRAM PERIOD AND FUNDING.
``There shall be available to the Secretary to carry out
this subpart, from funds not otherwise appropriated, such
sums as may be necessary to provide TEACH Grants and Bonus
TEACH Grants in accordance with this subpart to each eligible
applicant.''.
PART B--CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE
SEC. 311. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
Title II (20 U.S.C. 1021 et seq.) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``PART C--CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE
``SEC. 231. DEFINITIONS.
``As used in this part:
``(1) Eligible institution.--The term `eligible
institution' means--
``(A) an institution of higher education that has a teacher
preparation program that meets the requirements of section
203(b)(2)and that is--
``(i) a part B institution (as defined in section 322);
``(ii) a Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in
section 502);
``(iii) a Tribal College or University (as defined in
section 316);
``(iv) an Alaska Native-serving institution (as defined in
section 317(b)); or
``(v) a Native Hawaiian-serving institution (as defined in
section 317(b));
``(B) a consortium of institutions described in
subparagraph (A); or
``(C) an institution described in subparagraph (A), or a
consortium described in subparagraph (B), in partnership with
any other institution of higher education, but only if the
center of excellence established under section 232 is located
at an institution described in subparagraph (A).
``(2) Highly qualified.--The term `highly qualified' when
used with respect to an individual means that the individual
is highly qualified as determined under section 9101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7801) or section 602 of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1401).
``(3) Scientifically based reading research.--The term
`scientifically based reading research' has the meaning given
such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6368).
``(4) Scientifically based research.--The term
`scientifically based research' has the meaning given such
term in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``SEC. 232. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
``(a) Program Authorized.--From the amounts appropriated to
carry out this part, the Secretary is authorized to award
competitive grants to eligible institutions to establish
centers of excellence.
``(b) Use of Funds.--Grants provided by the Secretary under
this part shall be used to ensure that current and future
teachers are highly qualified, by carrying out one or more of
the following activities:
``(1) Implementing reforms within teacher preparation
programs to ensure that such programs are preparing teachers
who are highly qualified, are able to understand
scientifically based research, and are able to use advanced
technology effectively in the classroom, including use for
instructional techniques to improve student academic
achievement, by--
``(A) retraining faculty; and
``(B) designing (or redesigning) teacher preparation
programs that--
``(i) prepare teachers to close student achievement gaps,
are based on rigorous academic content, scientifically based
research (including scientifically based reading research),
and challenging State student academic content standards; and
``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
``(2) Providing sustained and high-quality preservice
clinical experience, including the mentoring of prospective
teachers by exemplary teachers, substantially increasing
interaction between faculty at institutions of higher
education and new and experienced teachers, principals, and
other administrators at elementary schools or secondary
schools, and providing support, including preparation time,
for such interaction.
``(3) Developing and implementing initiatives to promote
retention of highly qualified teachers and principals,
including minority teachers and principals, including
programs that provide--
``(A) teacher or principal mentoring from exemplary
teachers or principals; or
``(B) induction and support for teachers and principals
during their first 3 years of employment as teachers or
principals, respectively.
``(4) Awarding scholarships based on financial need to help
students pay the costs of tuition, room, board, and other
expenses of completing a teacher preparation program.
``(5) Disseminating information on effective practices for
teacher preparation and successful teacher certification and
licensure assessment preparation strategies.
``(6) Activities authorized under sections 202, 203, and
204.
[[Page H7528]]
``(c) Application.--Any eligible institution desiring a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such a time, in such a manner, and accompanied
by such information as the Secretary may require.
``(d) Minimum Grant Amount.--The minimum amount of each
grant under this part shall be $500,000.
``(e) Limitation on Administrative Expenses.--An eligible
institution that receives a grant under this part may not use
more than 2 percent of the grant funds for purposes of
administering the grant.
``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out this part.
``SEC. 233. APPROPRIATIONS.
``There shall be available to the Secretary, from funds not
otherwise appropriated, $50,000,000 for the period beginning
with fiscal year 2008 and ending with fiscal year 2012, to
carry out this part beginning with academic year 2008-2009,
which shall remain available until expended. The authority to
carry out this part shall expire at the end of fiscal year
2012.''.
TITLE IV--LEVERAGING FUNDS TO INCREASE COLLEGE ACCESS
PART A--STRENGTHENING HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND
MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS
SEC. 401. INVESTMENT IN HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES AND MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTION.
Title IV is amended by adding at the end the following new
part:
``PART I--STRENGTHENING HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
AND OTHER MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS
``SEC. 499A. INVESTMENT IN HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES AND OTHER MINORITY-SERVING
INSTITUTION.
``(a) Eligible Institution.--An institution of higher
education is eligible to receive funds from the amounts made
available under this section if such institution is--
``(1) a part B institution (as defined in section 322 (20
U.S.C. 1061));
``(2) a Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in section
502 (20 U.S.C. 1101a));
``(3) a Tribal College or University (as defined in section
316 (20 U.S.C. 1059c));
``(4) an Alaska Native-serving institution or a Native
Hawaiian-serving institution (as defined in section 317(b)
(20 U.S.C. 1059d(b)));
``(5) a Predominantly Black Institution (as defined in
subsection (c)); or
``(6) an Asian and Pacific Islander-serving institution (as
defined in subsection (c)).
``(b) New Investment of Funds.--
``(1) In general.--There shall be available to the
Secretary to carry out this section, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, $100,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008
through 2012. The authority to carry out this section shall
expire at the end of fiscal year 2012.
``(2) Allocation and allotment.--
``(A) In general.--Of the amounts made available under
paragraph (1) for any fiscal year--
``(i) 40 percent shall be available for allocation under
subparagraph (B);
``(ii) 40 percent shall be available for allocation under
subparagraph (C); and
``(iii) 20 percent shall be available for allocation under
subparagraph (D).
``(B) HSI stem and articulation programs.--The amount made
available for allocation under this subparagraph by
subparagraph (A)(i) for any fiscal year shall be available
for Hispanic-serving Institutions for activities described in
section 503, with a priority given to applications that
propose--
``(i) to increase the number of Hispanic and other low
income students attaining degrees in the fields of science,
technology, engineering and mathematics; and
``(ii) to develop model transfer and articulation
agreements between 2-year Hispanic-serving institutions and
4-year institutions in such fields.
``(C) Allocation and allotment hbcus and pbis.--From the
amount made available for allocation under this subparagraph
by subparagraph (A)(ii) for any fiscal year--
``(i) $34,000,000 shall be available to eligible
institutions described in subsection (a)(1) and shall be made
available as grants under section 323 and allotted among such
institutions under section 324, treating such amount, plus
the amount appropriated for such fiscal year in a regular or
supplemental appropriation Act to carry out part B of title
III, as the amount appropriated to carry out part B of title
III for purposes of allotments under section 324, for use by
such institutions with a priority for--
``(I) activities described in paragraphs (1), (2), (4),
(5), and (10) of section 323(a); and
``(II) other activities, consistent with the institution's
comprehensive plan and designed to increase the institution's
capacity to prepare students for careers in the physical and
natural sciences, mathematics, computer science and
information technology and sciences, engineering, language
instruction in the less-commonly taught languages and
international affairs, and nursing and allied health
professions; and
``(ii) $6,000,000 shall be available to eligible
institutions described in subsection (a)(5) and shall be
available for a competitive grant program to award 10 grants
of $600,000 annually for programs in the following areas:
science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM);
health education; internationalization or globalization;
teacher preparation; or improving educational outcomes of
African American males.
``(D) Allocation and allotment to other minority-serving
institutions.--From the amount made available for allocation
under this subparagraph by subparagraph (A)(iii) for any
fiscal year (in this subparagraph referred to as the
`allocable amount')--
``(i) 60 percent of the allocable amount for such fiscal
year shall be available to eligible institutions described in
subsection (a)(3) and shall be made available as grants under
section 316, treating such 60 percent of the allocable amount
as part of the amount appropriated for such fiscal year in a
regular or supplemental appropriation Act to carry out such
section, and using such 60 percent for purposes described in
subsection (c) of such section;
``(ii) 30 percent of the allocable amount for such fiscal
year shall be available to eligible institutions described in
subsection (a)(4) and shall be made available as grants under
section 317, treating such 30 percent of the allocable amount
as part of the amount appropriated for such fiscal year in a
regular or supplemental appropriation Act to carry out such
section and using such 60 percent for purposes described in
subsection (a) of such section; and
``(iii) 10 percent of the allocable amount for such fiscal
year shall be available to eligible institutions described in
subsection (a)(6) for activities described in section 311(c).
``(c) Definitions.--
``(1) Predominantly black institution.--The term
`Predominantly Black institution' means an institution of
higher education that--
``(A) has an enrollment of needy undergraduate students as
required and defined by paragraph (2);
``(B) has an average educational and general expenditure
which is low, per full-time equivalent undergraduate student
in comparison with the average educational and general
expenditure per full-time equivalent undergraduate student of
institutions that offer similar instruction, except that the
Secretary may apply the waiver requirements described in
section 392(b) to this subparagraph in the same manner as the
Secretary applies the waiver requirements to section
312(b)(1)(B);
``(C) has an enrollment of undergraduate students--
``(i) that is at least 40 percent Black American students;
``(ii) that is at least 1,000 undergraduate students;
``(iii) of which not less than 50 percent of the
undergraduate students enrolled at the institution are low-
income individuals or first-generation college students (as
that term is defined in section 402A(g)); and
``(iv) of which not less than 50 percent of the
undergraduate students are enrolled in an educational program
leading to a bachelor's or associate's degree that the
institution is licensed to award by the State in which it is
located;
``(D) is legally authorized to provide, and provides within
the State, an educational program for which the institution
of higher education awards a bachelors degree, or in the case
of a junior or community college, an associate's degree;
``(E) is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting
agency or association determined by the Secretary to be a
reliable authority as to the quality of training offered, or
is, according to such an agency or association, making
reasonable progress toward accreditation; and
``(F) is not receiving assistance under part B of title
III.
``(2) Enrollment of needy students.--The term `enrollment
of needy students' means the enrollment at an eligible
institution with respect to which not less than 50 percent of
the undergraduate students enrolled in an academic program
leading to a degree--
``(A) in the second fiscal year preceding the fiscal year
for which the determination is made, were Federal Pell Grant
recipients for such year;
``(B) come from families that receive benefits under a
means-tested Federal benefits program (as defined in
paragraph (4));
``(C) attended a public or nonprofit private secondary
school--
``(i) that is in the school district of a local educational
agency that was eligible for assistance under part A of title
I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 for
any year during which the student attended such secondary
school; and
``(ii) which for the purpose of this paragraph and for that
year was determined by the Secretary (pursuant to regulations
and after consultation with the State educational agency of
the State in which the school is located) to be a school in
which the enrollment of children counted under section
1113(a)(5) of such Act exceeds 30 percent of the total
enrollment of such school; or
``(D) are first-generation college students (as that term
is defined in section 402A(g)), and a majority of such first-
generation college students are low-income individuals.
``(3) Low-income individual.--The term `low-income
individual' has the meaning given such term in section
402A(g).
``(4) Means-tested federal benefit program.--The term
`means-tested Federal benefit program' means a program of the
Federal Government, other than a program under title IV, in
which eligibility for the programs' benefits, or the amount
of such benefits, or both, are determined on the basis of
income or resources of the individual or family seeking the
benefit.
``(5) Asian american and pacific islander-serving
institution.--The term `Asian American and Pacific Islander-
serving institution' means an institution of higher education
that--
``(A) is an eligible institution under section 312(b); and
``(B) at the time of application, has an enrollment of
undergraduate students that is at least 10 percent Asian
American and Pacific Islander students.
``(6) Asian american.--The term `Asian American' has the
meaning given the term `Asian' in the Office of Management
and Budget's Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and
Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity as
[[Page H7529]]
published on October 30, 1997 (62 Fed. Reg. 58789).
``(7) Pacific islander.--The term `Pacific Islander' has
the meaning given the term `Native Hawaiian' or `Other
Pacific Islander' in such Standards for Maintaining,
Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and
Ethnicity.
``(d) Termination of Authority.--The authority to carry out
this section expires at the end of fiscal year 2012.''.
PART B--COLLEGE ACCESS CHALLENGE GRANTS
SEC. 411. COLLEGE ACCESS CHALLENGE GRANTS.
(a) Challenge Grant Program Established.--
(1) Program established.--The Secretary shall establish a
program to award matching grants to increase the number of
eligible students from underserved populations who enter and
complete college by providing grants to philanthropic
organizations who are members of eligible consortia to carry
out the activities of the consortia to achieve this purpose,
including--
(A) providing need-based grants to eligible students;
(B) providing support to eligible students through school-
or institution-based mentoring programs; and
(C) conducting outreach programs to encourage eligible
students to pursue higher education.
(2) Grant period; renewability.--Grants under this section
shall be awarded for one 5-year period, and may not be
renewed.
(3) Grant amounts.--
(A) In general.--A grant awarded under this part for a
given fiscal year to a philanthropic organization shall be in
an amount equal to the lesser of--
(i) 200 percent of the amount of charitable gifts received
in the preceding fiscal year by the eligible consortia,
including charitable gifts received by the individual members
of the consortia with which the philanthropic organization is
associated; or
(ii) the maximum grant amount established by the Secretary
by regulation, pursuant to subsection (f).
(B) Gifts provided in cash or in-kind.--For the purposes of
subparagraph (A), the charitable gifts received by an
eligible consortia and its members may be provided in cash or
in-kind, including physical non-cash contributions of
monetary value such as property, facilities, and equipment,
but excluding services.
(b) Uses of Grant.--
(1) In general.--A philanthropic organization receiving a
grant under this section shall--
(A) provide grants to eligible students; and
(B) distribute grants to members of the consortia with
which the philanthropic organization is affiliated, in
accordance with the plan described in subsection (c)(2)(A),
to fund the activities of such consortia in accordance with
the application under subsection (c).
(2) Limitation.--Not more than 15 percent of the funds made
available annually through a grant under this section may be
used for administrative purposes.
(c) Applications.--A philanthropic organization desiring a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require. Such application
shall include the following:
(1) A description of an eligible consortia that meets the
requirements of subsection (d), with which the philanthropic
organization is affiliated, in accordance with subsection
(g).
(2) A detailed description of--
(A) the philanthropic organization's plans for distributing
the matching grant funds among the members of the eligible
consortia; and
(B) the eligible consortia's plans for using the matching
grant funds, including how the funds will be used to provide
financial aid, mentoring, and outreach programs to eligible
students.
(3) A plan to ensure the viability of the eligible
consortia and the work of the consortia beyond the grant
period.
(4) A detailed description of the activities that carry out
this section that are conducted by the eligible consortia at
the time of the application, and how the matching grant funds
will assist the eligible consortia with expanding and
enhancing such activities.
(5) A description of the organizational structure that will
be used to administer the activities carried out under the
plan, including a description of the system used to track the
participation of students who receive grants to degree
completion.
(6) A description of the strategies that will be used to
identify eligible students who are enrolled in secondary
school and who may benefit from the activities of the
eligible consortia.
(d) Eligible Consortia.--An eligible consortia with which a
philanthropic organization is affiliated for the program
under this section shall--
(1) be a partnership of mulitple entities that have agreed
to work together to carry out this section, including--
(A) such philanthropic organization, which shall serve as
the manager of the consortia;
(B) a State that demonstrates a commitment to ensuring the
creation of a Statewide system to address the issues of early
intervention and financial support for eligible students to
enter and remain in college; and
(C) at the discretion of the philanthropic organization
described in subparagraph (A), additional partners, including
other non-profit organizations, government entities
(including local municipalities, school districts, cities,
and counties), institutions of higher education, and other
public or private programs that provide mentoring or outreach
programs; and
(2) conduct activites to assist eligible students with
entering and remaining in college, which include--
(A) providing need-based grants to eligible students;
(B) providing early notification to low-income students of
their potential eligibility for Federal financial aid (which
may include assisting students and families with filling out
FAFSA forms), as well as financial aid and other support
available from the eligible consortia;
(C) encouraging increased eligible student participation in
higher education through mentoring or outreach programs; and
(D) conducting marketing and outreach efforts that are
designed to--
(i) encourage full participation of eligible students in
the activities of the consortia that carry out this section;
and
(ii) provide the communities impacted by the activities of
the consortia with a general knowledge about the efforts of
the consortia.
(e) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate
regulations to carry out this section. Such regulations shall
include--
(1) the maximum grant amount that may be awarded to a
philanthropic organization under this section;
(2) the minimum amount of chartable gifts an eligible
consortia (including its members) shall receive in a fiscal
year for the philanthropic organization affiliated with such
consortia to be eligible for a grant under this section.
(f) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
(1) Eligible student.--The term ``eligible student'' means
an individual who--
(A) is a member of an underserved population;
(B) is enrolled--
(i) in a secondary school pursuing a high school diploma;
or
(ii) in an institution of higher education or is planning
to attend an institution of higher education; and
(C) either--
(i) is receiving, or has received, financial assistance or
support services from the consortium; or
(ii) meets 2 or more of the following criteria:
(I) Has an expected family contribution equal to zero (as
described in section 479 of the Higher Education Act of 1965)
or a comparable alternative based upon the State's approved
criteria in section 415C(b)(4) of such Act.
(II) Has qualified for a free lunch, or at the State's
discretion a reduced price lunch, under the school lunch
program established under the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act.
(III) Qualifies for the State's maximum need-based
undergraduate award.
(IV) Is participating in, or has participated in, a
Federal, State, institutional, or community mentoring or
outreach program, as recognized by the eligible consortia
carrying out activities under this section.
(2) Philanthropic organization.--The term ``philanthropic
organization'' means a non-profit organization--
(A) that does not receive funds under title IV of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 or under the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965;
(B) that is not a local educational agency or an insitution
of higher education;
(C) that has a demonstrated record of dispersing grant aid
to underserved populations to ensure access to, and
participation in, higher education;
(D) that is affiliated with an eligible consortia (as
defined in subsection (d)) to carry out this section; and
(E) the primary purpose of which is to provide financial
aid and support services to students from underrepresented
populations to increase the number of such students who enter
and remain in college.
(3) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and
Puerto Rico.
(4) Underserved population.--The term ``underserved
population'' means a group of individuals who traditionally
have not been well represented in the general population of
students who pursue and successfully complete a higher
education degree.
(g) Program Funding.--
(1) In general.--There shall be available to the Secretary
to carry out this section, from funds not otherwise
appropriated, $300,000,000 for the period beginning with
fiscal year 2008 and ending with fiscal year 2012.
(2) Use of excess funds.--If, at the end of a fiscal year,
the funds available for awarding grants under this section
exceed the amount necessary to make such grants, then all of
the excess funds shall remain available for the subsequent
fiscal year, and shall be used to award grants under section
401 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a) for
such subsequent fiscal year.
(h) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section shall
expire at the end of fiscal year 2012.
PART C--UPWARD BOUND
SEC. 412. UPWARD BOUND.
(a) Absolute Priority Prohibited in Upward Bound Program.--
Section 402C (20 U.S.C. 1070a-13) is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(f) Absolute Priority Prohibited in Upward Bound
Program.--Except as otherwise expressly provided by amendment
to this section, the Secretary shall not implement or
enforce, and shall rescind, the absolute priority for Upward
Bound Program participant selection and evaluation published
by the Department of Education in the Federal Register on
September 22, 2006 (71 Fed. Reg. 55447 et seq.).''.
(b) Additional Funds.--Section 402C is further amended by
adding after subsection (f) (as added by subsection (a)) the
following new subsection:
``(g) Additional Funds.--
``(1) Authorization and appropriation.--There are
authorized to be appropriated, and
[[Page H7530]]
there are appropriated to the Secretary, from funds not
otherwise appropriated, $30,000,000 for each of the fiscal
years 2008 through 2011 to carry out paragraph (2), except
that any amounts that remain unexpended for such purpose for
each of such fiscal years may be available for technical
assistance and administration costs for the Upward Bound
program.
``(2) Use of funds.--The amounts made available by
paragraph (1) shall be available to provide assistance to all
Upward Bound projects that did not receive assistance in
fiscal year 2007 and that have a grant score above 70. Such
assistance shall be made available in the form of 4-year
grants.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. After 1 hour of debate on the bill, as
amended, it shall be in order to consider the amendment in the nature
of a substitute printed in part B of the report if offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) or his designee, which shall be
considered read, and shall be separately debatable for 1 hour, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent.
The gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the gentleman
from California (Mr. McKeon) each will control 30 minutes of debate on
the bill.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. George
Miller).
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5
minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2669, the College Cost
Reduction Act of 2007, which was reported by the Committee on Education
and Labor pursuant to the reconciliation instructions of the budget
resolution. The committee was tasked to decrease the deficit by $750
million without reducing the assistance that makes college more
affordable to students.
In keeping with that policy, this bill will significantly reduce the
costs that place college out of reach for far too many students today.
This bill represents the largest effort to help students and families
pay for college since 1944, when the Congress passed the GI Bill, which
helped millions of veterans go to college, the first generation to do
so under that legislation.
For years, college costs are rising rapidly and are far outstripping
families' ability to pay for them. Students are graduating with more
debt than ever before and are working harder to pay back the loans
which they borrowed to pay for their college education.
Several hundred thousand students a year now decide to forego a
college education, even though they are completely qualified, fully
prepared to go to college, because they don't know how they'll pay for
it or how they'll manage the debt that they will inherit when they
graduate.
Recognizing this need, H.R. 2669 demonstrates our commitment to
growing and strengthening America's middle class by making college more
affordable and accessible for all qualified students. It also
recognizes our commitment to those who are less fortunate, for low-
income families, to make sure that we increase the Pell Grants that are
available to the students, and also low-cost loans to those same
students who need to borrow beyond the Pell Grant.
The College Cost Reduction Act, which passed the Committee on
Education and Labor with bipartisan support, boosts the college
financial aid by roughly $18 billion over the next 5 years. And this
bill does so in a fiscally responsible way. We are committed to the
pay-as-you-go budget rules, and we honor that commitment with this
legislation.
H.R. 2669 recognizes that we have an obligation to make sure that
students have the maximum opportunity to take advantage of a college
education and that they need access to that education, they need
preparation for that education, they need success while they're there,
and they need completion of their education. To do that we've made sure
that, regardless of their background, that they will be prepared for
college, they will have access to higher education, they will graduate
to achieve their goals, and they will not be so burdened with
unmanageable debt that that becomes a failure.
The bill does that by, for low-income students, increasing the Pell
Grant $500 over the next 4 years. This is a very significant increase
in the Pell Grant. As many know, the President promised many years ago
that he would have it up to $5,100, and the fact of the matter is it
was at $4,050. They failed to increase the Pell Grants.
It cuts in half the interest rates for subsidized loans for
hardworking families that are going to borrow money, students that are
borrowing money. We will cut their interest rates in half from 6.8
percent to 3.4 percent. This will save the average student graduating
with about $13,000 in debt, $4,400 over the life of that loan. We
guarantee that those students who borrow this money, when they begin
their time in the work world, they will not have to commit more, if
they decide not to, to commit more than 15 percent of their income to
pay back the loans so that they can enter those professions that may
not have great starting wages, but over time in that career, they will
build up income.
We also provide, in keeping with the mandate, to try to provide
highly qualified teachers in every classroom for students who are
excelling in college and want to teach, if they make a commitment to
teach in difficult public schools, we will provide $4,000 a year in
tuition assistance while they're in school, not after they graduate,
while they're in school, to a maximum of $16,000.
For those students who go to college and they get their degrees and
they want to enter professions and serve the public, they want to be
first responders, they want to be nurses, they want to be firefighters
and public defenders and prosecutors and special education teachers and
early childhood teachers, we offer them a $5,000 forgiveness of their
loans if they stay in that field for 5 years. We know that in each one
of these areas there is a crisis in attracting people to those fields.
Many in Congress, hundreds of Members of Congress, have co-authored
legislation to provide loan forgiveness for some of these professions.
This bill, in fact, funds that loan forgiveness for those individuals.
We also increase the loan limits so that students will have greater
access to more money to pay for the increasing cost of college and not
have to go to the private market, where they will be able to continue
to take advantage of the subsidies provided in the Federal loan
program.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 2 additional
minutes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. We also make a landmark investment
in minority-serving institutions to make sure that those institutions
that serve a disproportionate number of minority students are able to
provide the services, to make sure that those students who are fully
qualified to go to college, who are prepared to go to college, in fact,
stay in college, so we don't have a continuation of the situation we
had today where, all too often, because services aren't provided in
college to help those students stay in college, those students end up
out of college, no diploma and a lot of debt. And we want to make sure
that that, in fact, doesn't happen.
So today this legislation provides a great deal of promise and a
great deal of assistance and a great deal of resources to those
students and their families who are sitting down figuring out how
they're going to pay for this college education that is so incredibly
valuable today if you're going to fully participate in the American
economic system, if you're going to participate in our democratic
society.
This is a very, very important piece of legislation. This is
legislation that is designed to help these students be able to pay for
that education.
We do something else in this legislation. We set up a partnership
where we go to the private sector, to wealthy individuals, to
corporations, to foundations, and we tell them for every dollar that
they'll put up to pay for essentially a Pell-eligible student to
complete their education without going into debt, we will match them 50
cent on the dollar.
We are told by those individuals who have actively been participating
in raising money for these students that this should allow them to
raise hundreds of millions of dollars additionally because of that
match; to have that public/private partnership pursuing one of the
great goals of this great democratic society, which is to make sure
that a student from any part of American society who's prepared to go
to college can, in fact, go to college.
[[Page H7531]]
So we not only have the government helping them out, we also have
private citizens, corporations, philanthropic organizations, and in
some cases even local governments if they decide this is good for their
economy, and we will provide a match to help them do that.
This is a comprehensive bill. It recognizes the complex needs of
families and students to gain access to college, to pay for college,
and to succeed in their employment afterwards; and I would urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I also ask unanimous consent for 2
additional minutes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2669, the cleverly titled
College Cost Reduction Act. And what I would like to encourage my
colleagues to do, in listening to this debate, is try to find what in
this bill actually will cut or lower the cost of a college education.
{time} 1230
There will be a lot of talk about cutting subsidies to lenders. There
will be a lot of talk about lowering student interest rates, which
actually then is paid to graduates of college, but what are we doing to
hold down the cost of a college education? The cost of higher education
has been going up more than four times the rate of inflation for the
last 20 years, and we have not done anything to lower those costs.
This bill allegedly has been crafted to balance fiscal responsibility
with significant new aid for college students and their families. In
fact, the majority touts the bill as the most substantial package of
new benefits since the GI bill. But under the microscope, it is clear
that these claims fall completely flat.
In reality, this legislation is nothing more than a Trojan Horse for
new entitlement spending at the long-term expense for American
taxpayers. Even though we are considering this bill under the expedited
procedure of budget reconciliation, which, as my colleagues know, is
intended for real deficit reduction, this bill simply and shamelessly
exploits the process. It cuts roughly $18.58 billion over 5 years in
payments to student loan providers but simultaneously spends more than
$17 billion during that same period on multiple programs, including
nine new entitlement programs. So while they are talking about cutting
mandatory spending, they are actually creating nine new entitlement
programs, an apparent net savings of less than 9 percent.
These new entitlements include grants to Native Alaskan, Native
Hawaiian and other minority-serving institutions, grants to
institutions with low tuition, grants to institutions to create new
teacher preparation programs, grants to philanthropic organizations, a
new mandatory Perkins loan program, cooperative education grants, and
on and on and on. These sound like wonderful things, and I think what
we are really seeing is that Democrats are Democrats. Give them an
opportunity to spend money, they can't help themselves.
History has proven that once Washington, DC creates a new entitlement
program, it never ever dies. In other words, taxpayers will foot the
bill for this onslaught of new entitlement spending for years to come.
These same students that will be given some savings through some of
these special entitlement programs eventually are going to have to pay
for them in higher taxes that they will provide later. During that
time, it will certainly dwarf the token ``savings'' found in H.R. 2669.
It should be noted, too that much of this new entitlement spending is
aimed at colleges, universities and philanthropic organizations, which
we have never done before. The Federal Government has been sending
Federal money to the students directly. Now they are sending it to
organizations rather than to the students. This represents a historic
departure from the intent of Federal student aid programs. As long as
the Higher Education Act has existed, student aid entitlement dollars
have been targeted towards students themselves. It is lost on me how
sending these funds to institutions rather than to the students
attending them helps more Americans pay for college. I doubt that we
will see any reduction in tuition rates when they get this new money.
But that is just what H.R. 2669 aims to do.
What is more, Mr. Speaker, other proposals included in this bill,
such as the interest rate cut for certain college graduates included in
the ill-fated Six for '06 legislation passed earlier this year, will
have even more explosive long-term costs that could amount to tens of
billions more in Federal Government spending. Who will be paying for
it? You guessed it. The American taxpayers. And don't forget the cut to
interest rates would not aid a single college student. Only graduates.
Rather, the benefit would be aimed squarely at those who by definition
no longer attend college. While the intent of this new spending is
admirable, it is equally misdirected.
Mr. Speaker, President Bush has threatened a veto of this
disingenuous legislation and for good reason. With billions in new
programs, most of which are directed toward institutions and graduates
rather than students, those who really need the help to get into
college and stay in college to get on the ladder to achieve the
American Dream, this bill marks the first step towards an explosion in
new, unchecked entitlement spending and another unfortunate step toward
further hyperinflation in college costs.
Indeed, the measure before us overreaches by creating new entitlement
spending for every conceivable constituency in higher education. It
overreaches by failing to focus on the historical Federal roll in
higher education supported by Democrats and Republicans alike: helping
low-income students. And it overreaches by extracting too much out of
the Federal Financial Aid Program, which has been a success by all
measures.
I cannot support it, and I ask my colleagues to join me in
opposition.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Loebsack).
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for
yielding.
I rise today in strong support of the College Cost Reduction Act of
2007, and I thank Chairman Miller for his impressive work on this
legislation.
As a result of this legislation, Iowa students and families will
receive $232 million over 5 years in additional benefits in the form of
student loans and Pell grants. Almost 77,000 students will benefit from
the eligibility expansion and Pell Grant increase in this bill.
I am also very pleased that an amendment that I offered in committee
to allow part-time students and students in certificate programs to
participate in the year-round Pell Grant program and accelerate their
studies was accepted.
As a long-time teacher at Cornell College in Iowa, I regularly
encountered students struggling to afford their education, and I am
certain that this bill makes the right investments at a critical time
for our students.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I strongly support its
passage.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes at this time to the
gentleman from Wisconsin, the ranking member of the Budget Committee
(Mr. Ryan).
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I thank the ranking member for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, the student aid bill that passed out of the Committee on
Education and Labor is nothing but a Trojan Horse for new spending. In
fact, the bill creates nine, count it, nine new entitlement programs
and abuses the protection of reconciliation procedures through token
budgetary ``savings.'' It also favors the government-controlled and
costly direct lending program over the nonprofit and commercial
lenders, promoting a back-door expansion of taxpayer-financed student
support and a substantial increase in taxpayer liability.
I want to make four basic points, Mr. Speaker: Number one, budget
experts have unequivocally warned Congress, experts from the left and
from the right and center and everywhere else, that the unrestrained
growth in entitlement spending programs is the most
[[Page H7532]]
fundamental challenge and the largest threat to our Nation's long-term
economic health. Comptroller General David Walker refers to the rising
costs of entitlements as a ``fiscal cancer'' that threatens
``catastrophic consequences for our country'' and could ``bankrupt
America.'' Despite all of these warnings, the majority not only failed
to address the problem in their budget; they are choosing to make the
problem even worse by creating nine new entitlement programs in this
bill alone. That is nine new entitlement programs and nothing, not a
zilch, of reforms. They're not expanding. They're not replacing. They
are creating nine new entitlement programs. While the bill claims that
some of these programs will sunset, we all know entitlement programs,
once created, never die.
Second, this creates a new mandatory Pell Grant program. Among the
new entitlement programs created is an unprecedented mandatory Pell
Grant. The Pell grant is a great program, and under Republican
leadership, we saw a tripling of Pell Grants from the year 1996 to
2006. Suddenly, this authorizing committee doesn't think that it is
enough, and it is planning on taking the committee away from the
appropriators into their jurisdiction, making an entitlement which, in
my opinion, reduces congressional oversight.
Third, this contains no meaningful reform whatsoever. The bill
contains none at all. It represents business as usual for existing
programs, except that interest rates and limits in existing programs
are changed to make room for more spending. Rather than maybe putting
the savings in special education or deficit reduction to fund an
unfunded mandate in local schools or reducing our deficit, it creates
all of these new programs and this new spending. They will add from $15
billion to $32 billion in spending over the next 5 years alone on top
of the already unsustainable entitlement costs we are facing today.
Instead of reducing long-term spending, they are using a vehicle
originally intended to limit spending to do just the opposite, to fund
these new programs.
This bill gets Fast-Track legislation under the guise of deficit
reduction, under the guise of controlling spending. Yet what we see
here today is a bill that takes $18.58 billion from student loan
providers only to spend more than $17.13 billion on new entitlement
programs. The savings of this bill is 9 percent, a net savings of 9
percent.
Look at these two bars on the chart next to me. Does it look like the
savings are anywhere near the new spending level, or does it look like
a sliver of savings is being used to abuse the process of expedited
reconciliation protection so they can create all of these new programs?
I offered an amendment in the Rules Committee that would have
required that the bulk of these savings be going toward deficit
reduction. It is the same amendment that Senator Kent Conrad, the
chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, offered and was passed by
unanimous consent on the Senate floor. I couldn't even get this
amendment past the Rules Committee, much less on the floor of the
House.
There is one last point, Mr. Speaker, that bears repeating, and that
is, this favors government over markets. It increases taxpayer
liabilities. It favors a government-controlled and costly direct
lending program over nonprofit and commercial lenders, promoting a
back-door expansion of taxpayer-financed student support. As students
are pushed toward the government monopoly, the student benefits and
services provided by nongovernment lenders to attract business would be
lost. Further, the government-run program only handles 20 percent of
the loans today. It would be overwhelmed with the new business and shut
done, as it has been in the past, when large volumes shifted to the
program.
I just want to finish with one quote from the Democrat chairman of
the Budget Committee: ``The reconciliation instruction that led to this
bill'' we are seeing here today is a ``stalking horse for a significant
expansion of spending.''
Please join me in opposing this back-door expansion of new
entitlement spending. Let's use budget reconciliation for what it was
made for, reducing the deficit and controlling spending, rather than
creating nine new entitlements.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose
of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Gene Green).
(Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the
College Reduction Act of 2007, and I thank the chairman and the
committee for bringing this bill to the floor. I think it is a great
step forward for our college students.
This important piece of legislation will strengthen the middle class
by making college more affordable in several ways at no additional cost
to taxpayers.
First, it will increase the maximum Pell grant scholarship by at
least $500 over the next 5 years, and expand student eligibility for
other grants like the National SMART grant. Both of these things will
increase the purchasing power for students who otherwise would not be
able to afford going to college.
In Texas alone, over 475,000 students will benefit from a $500
increase in the Pell grant.
In addition, this bill will cut interest rates on need-based Federal
student loans from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent over the next 5 years.
All of this will be done at no additional cost to the taxpayers by
cutting excess subsidies paid by the Federal Government to lenders in
the student loan industry.
Four of the six offsets were already approved by the House this year,
when it overwhelmingly voted to pass the College Student Relief Act of
2007 this past January.
During the past few years, student lenders have been able to increase
their efficiencies through market-driven mechanisms, but the
Government's subsidization has continued unchecked.
The Congress has a chance to help the American people at no
additional cost for the taxpayer. How can we resist doing this?
In our district, financial barriers often inhibit the ability of high
school graduates to go to college.
By reducing student loan interest rates and increasing Federal
grants, we are encouraging families and students to get a college
education.
When we pass this legislation, we are investing in the future of our
economy, because we will have more college graduates with a lower debt
burden. This will enable graduates to do things like buy homes, invest,
and fuel our economy.
This is such a critical bill, and it's important that this body
approach this bill in a manner that shows bipartisan support for
educating our children.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes).
Mr. SARBANES. I thank the chairman for yielding time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in support of H.R. 2669, the
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007, which would provide the most
significant investment in higher education since the GI bill. I
strongly urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I thank
Chairman Miller for his leadership.
What we do here in Congress does matter. It does matter to ordinary
people and to the average American. I was struck by an article in USA
Today earlier this year about a family whose daughter was pursuing an
undergraduate degree in art. Despite the fact that their daughter
received scholarships to cover about a fifth of her cost, this family
had to clean out their emergency savings account and their college
savings fund and then borrow from the family's 401(K) plan. Still their
daughter will graduate with $45,000 in loans. That's just not right. It
doesn't have to be that hard. And it won't be that hard if we pass the
College Cost Reduction Act, which cuts interest rates for student
loans, provides fiscally responsible and targeted loan forgiveness, and
increases and expands the Pell Grant program.
I was thrilled to be able to work with Chairman Miller and others on
the committee to ensure provisions that would advance loan forgiveness.
This is a terrific bill, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R.
2669.
{time} 1245
Mr. McKEON. I am happy to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas, chairman of the RSC (Mr. Hensarling).
Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
[[Page H7533]]
Mr. Speaker, this might possibly be the single most fiscally
irresponsible bill to come to the floor this year, and it has had a lot
of healthy competition. Why? Because this bill would create nine, count
them, nine, Mr. Speaker, new entitlement programs.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we all know what entitlement programs are;
sometimes the American people don't. These are the programs that we put
on automatic pilot that get very little oversight. And these nine new
entitlement programs are going to be on top of almost 10,000 other
Federal programs that are already on the books. And we know that it is
entitlement spending that is threatening future generations and
threatening their educational opportunities.
As the ranking member on the Budget Committee, the gentleman from
Wisconsin talked about, we've heard from our chairman of the Federal
Reserve, ``Without early and meaningful action to address the rapid
growth of entitlements, the U.S. economy could be seriously weakened,
with future generations bearing much of the costs, costs that could
have been used for their educational opportunities.''
We've heard from Comptroller General Walker, ``The rising costs of
government entitlements are a fiscal cancer that threatens catastrophic
consequences for our country and could bankrupt America.'' And what
does this bill do, Mr. Speaker? It ignores this greatest fiscal threat
to our Nation, a threat to educational opportunities, and dumps nine
new entitlement spending programs on top of it.
Now, I have no doubt that the bill's sponsor will claim that this
saves money, but it uses gimmicks. It claims that these entitlements
will expire. Well, Mr. Speaker, we see Haley's Comet more frequently
than we ever see an entitlement program expiring in the Nation's
Capitol. It's got interest rate snapbacks. And we all know that once
these entitlement seeds grow, the cost will be borne by future
generations.
One thing I want to make very clear, Mr. Speaker, is that the worst
part of this program is that it will ultimately lessen educational
opportunities for hardworking American families. And it will because it
is all part of a Democratic spend-and-tax program. Programs like these
necessitate the largest single tax increase in American history, which
they put into their budget, which takes away from families'
opportunities to spend on their educational opportunities.
I heard from Melanie in Chandler, Texas, who's in my district. She
wrote, ``Congressman, if I have to pay more taxes, then I can't afford
to go to school. If taxes are raised, I won't have a choice but to quit
school and go back to work.''
I heard from Rose in Garland, Texas, also in my congressional
district. ``I'm a divorced mother with a child in college and a child
in daycare. An increase in taxes would wipe out hope of the first
college graduate in the family.''
I heard from Bruce in Garland. ``In my particular case, an additional
$2,200 in taxes would cut into the finances I use to pay for my son's
college education. I really believe that given more money, Congress
will spend more money, so that is not the answer. A control in
reduction of spending is what is needed.''
Now, Mr. Speaker, there are very few opportunities that are as
wondrous and as fundamental to the American Dream as education. And so
I want to make it very clear again today, we're not having a debate
over how much we're going to spend as a Nation on education, but we are
having a very fundamental debate on who does that spending.
This bill, brought by the Democrat majority, would put all of the
control in government. It would reduce opportunities. It would reduce
choice. It would reduce innovation for families trying to finance
education. And ironically, as part of the largest single tax increase
in American history, it takes money away from families. But if people
beg for it, maybe they'll get a little bit of it back.
We should reject this bill.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield myself 15 seconds to say,
it's most interesting to sit here and be lectured by people who, when
they controlled every department of government, every branch of
government, they took a $5 trillion surplus that they inherited from
the Clinton administration and immediately turned it into a $3 trillion
debt that this Nation now is carrying around as it tries to compete in
the world. To be lectured by mindless spenders like that is really a
treat on this floor.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I have many good things to say about this bill. I urge
my colleagues to support it, but let me focus on a couple of quick
things.
First, it is a long overdue and much-needed infusion of support for
Federal need-based financial aid programs. It raises the Pell Grant
maximum from $4,310 to $5,200 over a period of years. It increases the
Federal capital contribution for the Perkins loan program, a program,
by the way, that this administration seems intent on killing, and it
increases loan limits so that students will have access to greater
support.
In doing all of those things, we help students avoid what has become
termed the ``wild west'' of student lending, that is, the private loan
market. We have driven students to the private loan market because we
have not properly supported the programs that currently exist. And with
these increases, we will be properly supporting those programs.
And lastly, the reduction in the interest rates has been
characterized by the other side as not affecting access or
affordability and, in fact, it does. Students make decisions about the
schools that they are going to attend by virtue of their anticipated
indebtedness, and we address that.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, might I inquire as to how much time is
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 17
minutes. Mr. Miller from California has 21\3/4\ minutes.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1 minute to the Democratic
leader.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for yielding, and I want to
congratulate the chairman. There is nobody in this body who has served
longer with more focus on the quality of education, the access to
higher education, and whether we're dealing with primary, secondary or
higher education, more concern than George Miller of California, and I
congratulate him on the service that he has given.
I also want to congratulate the ranking member, who himself has been
an outspoken advocate of education quality in America.
Let me say, before I start my remarks, that I'm always interested to
hear the comments of the ranking member of the Budget Committee and of
the leader of the Republican Study Committee. I'm interested to hear
their remarks because of course they have both said nine new
entitlements. I was here with both of them for 3 hours one night, from
3 a.m. to 6 a.m. in the morning, and we enacted the largest entitlement
that has been enacted since the 1960s, and we were told that was going
to cost $395 billion by the administration. The administration did not
tell us the truth, and they knew they were not telling us the truth.
And the person who knew the truth was prohibited by the administration
from giving us the truth on pain of being removed, a civil servant, not
an administration appointee. He knew the cost of that program, as he
projected it, was $524 billion, or $125 billion more than we were told
on this floor. But it was told $395 billion additional entitlement.
Now the interesting thing is that Mr. Ryan and Mr. Hensarling both
voted for that program. That program has a larger unfunded liability as
of this day than Social Security. So I think the lecture on fiscal
responsibility is, frankly, not well taken.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I would be glad to yield to my friend.
Mr. HENSARLING. Did the gentleman support the Democrat alternative
that cost even more, as scored by CBO?
Mr. HOYER. The gentleman, of course, is not on this floor lamenting
[[Page H7534]]
the creation of entitlements as is my friend from Texas, so I suggest
your question is inappropriate because your concern is about
entitlements. But you voted for an entitlement that was the largest
entitlement passed on the floor of this House in four decades, about as
long as I think the gentleman has been alive. I wish that I could say
the same; unfortunately, I've been alive a lot longer than that. So I
think the question begs the question, my friend.
But let me say about this landmark legislation, the College Cost
Reduction of 2007 is yet another example of how this Democratic
Congress is committed to moving our Nation in a new and better
direction and working on behalf of the American people.
In short, this legislation will provide the single largest investment
in college financial aid, and about $18 billion over the next 5 years.
Now, that is about one-fifteenth of the mistake that was made in the
entitlement that you supported, my friend. And it's the largest since
the GI Bill was funded in 1944. The GI Bill was an entitlement. And
very frankly, the Greatest Generation was worth investing in. And that
investment has paid off 100 fold in the economy that this Greatest
Generation built in America, and it will do so in this case as well.
And it does so at no new cost to the American taxpayer by cutting
excess subsidies paid by the Federal Government to lenders in the
student loans industry. The administration suggested $16 billion. We're
a little above that. So there is not a disagreement as to whether or
not there is an overpayment here; it's a question of where you're going
to put your money. In fact, it includes a $750 million, not a lot of
money in the scheme of billions of dollars and trillions of dollars,
reduction in the deficit.
A few months ago Bill Gates, the chairman and cofounder of the
Microsoft Corporation and one of our Nation's great innovators, wrote
in the Washington Post, ``If we, the United States, are to remain
competitive, we need a workforce that consists of the world's brightest
minds.'' That's what this bill seeks to enhance. Mr. Gates added,
``Education has always been the gateway to a better life in this
country.''
Mr. Speaker, this legislation not only recognizes that education is a
key to personal development, fulfillment and success, but also, and
critically, a crucial factor in our national competitiveness, our
continued prosperity, and yes, I suggest to all of my colleagues, our
national security.
Simply stated, this legislation will make a college education more
affordable for millions of students and their families. The fact is,
college tuition today is exploding. Tuition at 4-year public colleges
has grown by 35 percent in the last 5 years. Let me say in my State of
Maryland, tuition cost has gone up 43 percent in the last 4 years.
America cannot afford to shut people out of the access to college
education if we're going to be successful in world markets in a flat
world, as Tom Friedman refers to it. Too many students graduate with
tremendous debt, and too many others simply don't go to college because
they cannot afford it. To address this situation, this bill will
increase the maximum Pell Grant scholarships by at least $500 over the
next 5 years. That will not come close to what the Pell Grants
initially, when they were adopted, replaced in tuition costs, about 70
percent. We're now down to 30 percent. When combined with other Pell
scholarship increases proposed by Congress this year, the maximum Pell
Grant will reach $4,900 in 2008, $5,200 in 2011, up from $4,050 in
2006. Notwithstanding, the President in 2000, in his campaign, said he
was going to increase the Pell Grant very substantially. It doesn't
happen.
The bill also will cut interest in half on subsidized student loans
over the next 5 years, and it will guarantee that borrowers will not
have to pay more than 15 percent of their discretionary income to loan
repayments. In addition, this bill seeks to ensure highly qualified
teachers in every classroom, a critical need in our Nation, by
providing up-front tuition assistance to qualified students who commit
to teaching in public schools in high-poverty communities or high-need
areas. That is important for our country's ability to compete and to
develop every mind in America. There is not a child to waste in
America. We know that.
It encourages and rewards public service by providing loan
forgiveness for first responders, law enforcement officers,
firefighters, nurses and others. And it encourages landmark new
investment, $500 million guaranteed over 5 years, for Historically
Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, and
tribally controlled, native or predominantly black institutions.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation is a very significant and important
step toward realizing the goal of making college affordable for every
qualified student.
{time} 1300
I want to congratulate Chairman Miller once more and the staff and
all of the members of the committee and Mr. McKeon for the positive
role, whatever position one might take for or against, the positive
role that the committee has played. It is a historic investment in our
people and our Nation. I urge every Member to strongly support this
legislation.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I don't know how I am always so lucky, or unlucky, I
guess, to speak after the majority leader's minute, which is probably
the longest minute I have ever seen. But to listen to him talk, you
know, this weekend I bought a TV from somebody that was as good a
salesman as Mr. Hoyer. I didn't need the TV. It was too expensive, and
I really didn't want it. But after talking to the salesman, I ended up
thinking I needed it and I could afford it and it was what I needed. So
I bought it.
Mr. Hoyer and I have had this conversation on the floor before, and
that is that you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you
can't fool all of the people all of the time. So the American people
were sold a bill of goods last November, and they are continually being
sold things in this Congress.
I come from Georgia. We have the HOPE scholarship, Mr. Speaker, one
of the greatest tools for education that I think has been done. It
comes from a lottery, which a lot of people oppose, but a lot of young
people in Georgia are now able to go to college. What we found in
Georgia was that when the State started paying for the college tuition,
that the tuition went out of sight. It was another funding means for
these institutions of higher education to charge more.
Now, the majority leader said that tuition in Maryland had gone up 43
percent in 4 years. Well, if he thinks that is something, wait until
this bill passes. Because what is going to end up happening is that
when the government starts loaning the money and paying for this, those
tuitions are going to skyrocket, because the people that are getting it
don't really care how much the tuition is.
Let me say this: When I bought this TV that I didn't need, that I
couldn't afford, I got down to the bottom dollar of what I thought that
I could afford. Of course, this great salesman walked away because he
said, do you know what? If I can't make some money, I am not going to
do this. We ended up negotiating. What ended up happening is that I
paid up more than what I wanted to. He took less.
But a bank is not going to loan money if they can't make money. We
hear a lot of back and forth on this floor. We don't know who to
believe and who not to believe. Let me tell you the truth. If a bank, a
lending institution, cannot make money, they are not going to do
business with people. So the reality is that the private sector is
going to get out of making these loans, which is probably the last stop
we have of having any type of accountability to it. The government is
going to start doing it all. If the banks will not loan it at this
interest rate because they are losing money, and the government will,
then that means, again, here is the thing, if we continue to govern our
political correctness, the taxpayers end up holding the bag. They are
going to end up holding the bag on this.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House.
[[Page H7535]]
Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for your great leadership in bringing us to this historic
day. I thank all of the other members of the committee for their
leadership in making this day possible, for expanding America's middle
class, for giving opportunity to America's children, and for making our
future brighter.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the College Cost Reduction
Act of 2007.
In 1944, when the GI Bill of Rights became law, our Nation made a
decision. They made a decision to invest in the future. It was an
investment that transformed the lives of millions of Americans. It
transformed America to the benefit of all Americans. Indeed, it built
America.
Over the years, the GI Bill offered opportunity and economic security
through education to more than 20 million of the brave men and women
who wore our Nation's uniform. It has given America hundreds of
thousands of engineers, teachers and doctors, and it has given us a
model for the value of investing in the education of our people for our
country.
Today, with this legislation, we will make the single largest
increase in college aid since the GI Bill of Rights revolutionized
America. It is an investment for a bright future for our children, and,
just as the GI Bill has been, an investment in a bright future for our
Nation.
Any economist will tell you that any dollar spent on education is a
dollar that makes a big return to our Treasury. In fact, no dollar
invested or spent, no tax credit, no financial initiative you can name
brings more money to the Treasury than investing in education.
I want to again thank Chairman Miller and the distinguished members
of the Education and Labor Committee for their leadership in making
sure higher education is affordable and accessible.
In today's competitive job market, a college education often makes
all the difference. Americans with college degrees can earn 60 percent
more than those with only a high school diploma. So in the interests of
individuals, this is very, very important. Indeed, higher education is
the single best investment our young people can make in themselves,
that families can make in the success of their children, and our
country can make in its future strength.
It is important to note why this legislation is very important.
Financial barriers will prevent 4\1/2\ million high school graduates
from attending a 4-year public college over the next decade and prevent
another 2 million high school graduates from attending any college at
all. Over 6\1/2\ million students will not have access to some college
or any college at all.
Higher education, as we all know, is the key to achieving the
American dream. This legislation has made sure that all who are
qualified and determined to have that education will have access to it.
It has been said that cutting interest rates in half will make it
possible for more Americans to achieve their potential. This is
especially important for strengthening the middle class. Middle-income
families in America struggle to educate their children. This interest
rate cut is very important for them. By increasing the maximum Pell
Grant scholarship by over $500, nearly 6 million students will be given
help to afford expanding college costs.
In hearing the debate on the cost, I think that it is important to
note that the cost of this bill is the equivalent of 6 weeks in Iraq; 6
weeks in Iraq. Imagine that, for 6 weeks in Iraq, we can expand higher
education to all who wish to achieve it in America. That investment has
a return to our Treasury. It will grow our economy and prepare us for
the future.
This legislation is a very important part of our Innovation Agenda,
where we do need to invest in many more scientists, engineers and
mathematicians. By giving opportunities to highly qualified teachers in
our classrooms for this Innovation Agenda, it provides an essential
component for a bright future for our Nation. It will provide up-front
tuition for highly qualified teachers who agree to teach in high-needs
areas, increase loan forgiveness for those who practice civic
responsibility and encourage students to give back to their communities
as teachers, librarians, childcare and welfare workers and public
sector employees.
Members have talked about this over and over again. The fact is that,
again, for the cost of 6 weeks in Iraq, we can ensure the education of
our young people across the broad spectrum of America. We can reward
those who want to be civically involved as teachers. It is all paid
for.
Today, we are not only relieving the debt of America's students, but
doing so in a way that not only helps relieve their debt but does not
heap mountains of national debt on top of our young people. This
legislation keeps our promise to pay as you go with no new deficit
spending. Democrats believe that is just as essential as ensuring that
American students have the opportunity to attend college.
Mr. Speaker, the College Cost Reduction Act strengthens the future
for our students and it strengthens our Nation. I think, again, that
this is a historic day, because it is a day that is about the American
dream. It is a day about expanding opportunity in our country. It is a
day that recognizes that the best dollar that we can spend is a dollar
spent on education. It recognizes that education is the key to a
brilliant future, not only for the self-fulfillment of our people, but
for the success of our country. It is about our self-fulfillment
personally. It is about growing our economy. It is about our National
security. It is about carrying the banner of our Founders who have made
a commitment to future generations.
Thank you, Chairman Miller, and members of the Committee on Education
and Labor, for helping us honor that commitment to future generations.
I urge our colleagues to support this very important and historic
legislation.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Walberg), a member of the committee.
Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong opposition to this
cleverly entitled College Cost Reduction Act of 2007. Under the guise
of saving money and paying down the deficit, Democratic leaders are
using the budget reconciliation process as a vehicle to create a host
of expensive new Federal bureaucracies rather than making tough
decisions to restrain entitlement spending and balance the Federal
budget.
Mandatory spending programs consume the largest portion of the
Federal budget, and their share will only increase as Social Security
and Medicare costs explode in coming years. Unfortunately, this action
comes as no surprise. After reclaiming the majority under the claims of
fiscal accountability, House Democrats have already voted to approve a
massive $400 billion tax increase on working families and small
businesses, and may I add, that amounts to over $3,000 on average tax
increase for these students who we are attempting to help.
Now we are considering a piece of legislation that will create nine
new entitlement programs resulting in $18 billion in new spending. The
explosion in new, unchecked entitlement spending is another unfortunate
step backwards for the American taxpayer. I agree that Congress must
remain committed to ensuring affordable access to post-secondary
education. But instead of focusing the bulk of need on increasing
access to higher education for low-income students, the bill increases
aid to colleges and universities at the expense of students who receive
Pell Grants. H.R. 2669 only targets $4.9 billion towards Pell Grants,
increasing the maximum award by only $100 per year for 5 years. Pell
Grants have proven to be effective in helping low-income students
attain higher education. This bill will not prioritize Pell Grants.
I do wish to take a moment to thank Chairman Miller for working with
me to remove section 201 of his bill in his manager's amendment. I was
happy to work with our State's Governor to make this change. This
action withheld funds from the Leveraging Education Assistance
Partnership, known as the LEAP, if a State reduced the average amount
of funding it has provided over the last 5 years. This so-called
maintenance of effort provision is a bold and unprecedented overreach
of Federal authority designed to dictate State budgets.
[[Page H7536]]
{time} 1315
This is particularly true because the Federal Government provides
little direct assistance to States or higher education institutions.
Low-income and financially needy students should not have to struggle
because of a State's budgetary shortfalls. My home State of Michigan
continues to suffer from a struggling economy and difficult choices
must be made on how to most appropriately fund the State. However,
needy students should not have critical financial aid yanked away
because the State cannot afford the same financial commitment it has
made to the LEAP program in more prosperous years.
I was also prepared to offer an amendment to the House Rules
Committee concerning the Upward Bound program. I appreciate that the
chairman's manager's amendment removes a section that earmarked $30
million for prior Upward Bound grantees who submitted low-scoring
applications, bypassing 107 new applicants who submitted competitive
proposals.
But despite these small improvements, the College Cost Reduction Act
contains dozens of poison pills that mark another step towards
unchecked spending. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the so-
called College Cost Reduction Act.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago my friend from Georgia
described buying something he didn't need at a price he couldn't
afford. I want to thank him for giving us a perfect description of the
last 7 years of the governance of this country under the Bush
administration.
We got a lot of things we didn't need: a war in Iraq, a misadventure
in Iraq at a price we couldn't afford, $4 trillion in new debt under
their watch. We got $12 billion a month in Iraq under their watch.
This is something we do need and we can afford. Higher college
scholarships for American students, lower school loan interest rates
for American students. And it is paid for, unlike their massive
spending increase, unlike their tax break giveaways to the wealthy,
this does not increase the deficit by a dollar. We are changing their
failed policy of buying things we don't need at prices we can't afford.
They should vote for that change today.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon)
has 10\3/4\ minutes, and the gentleman from California (Mr. George
Miller) has 18\3/4\ minutes.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes
to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).
Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, today parents have a choice of a second
job, a second mortgage, or dipping into their savings to help pay for
their kids' college education, and that is the wrong choice to ask
parents to make.
In Illinois, tuition last year went up, increases of 14.5 percent,
the fourth largest increase of any State in America. Today when a kid
graduates from college, they graduate with an average of $15,000 of
debt. So on the front page they get a diploma, and on the back side,
they get their first credit card bill. That is the wrong choice for
America.
You could not write the American decade if you didn't look at the GI
bill and making a high school education universal in America. Those are
the two most significant economic acts of the last 100 years.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle noted two examples. One,
they are worried about the deficit. After $4 trillion of new debt, I
appreciate your conversion to concern about increasing the deficit, but
there is no deficit spending here.
Second, and most importantly, they talk about the importance of the
Pell Grants. This is after, in fact, the President's budget cut Pell
Grants one year $1 billion, and froze it for the last 3 years. We are
doing the right investment. Not one of us would be in this institution
if it wasn't for two things: the love of our parents and the access to
a higher education. We are providing Americans something different from
the last 6 years. Rather than slamming the door shut on their access to
a college education, we are opening the doors and making the American
Dream possible. I compliment our leadership for bringing this bill and
opening the doors of America's future with a good college education
bill.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire).
Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, when I was elected to the House of
Representatives last November, I asked to serve on the Higher Education
Subcommittee specifically so I could help make college more affordable
for American families, and this bill does just that. It raises Pell
Grant awards to their highest level in history. It cuts in half the
interest rates students will pay on their student loans, and this bill
rewards community service by providing loan forgiveness for those who
choose careers in important fields like first responders, law
enforcement, firefighters, and nurses.
And we do all of this at no additional cost to the taxpayer. This
bill is fully funded, and I am proud to have played a part in crafting
this important legislation.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), a member of the committee.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the ranking member for giving
me this time.
I have sat here and listened to this debate on this bill, and I want
to say we are back at dealing with hypocrisy again, as we have been on
a daily basis.
The College Cost Reduction Act, the title is not just a misnomer; it
is an outright lie. Much of the $18 billion in new spending doesn't
reduce the cost of college, but instead consists of new welfare
targeted at people who aren't even students.
And comparing this bill to the GI bill is truly, truly hypocrisy. We
instituted the GI bill to help men and women who had fought for this
country and returned to this country to help them get college education
and get back into our culture.
All this is going to do is increase the nanny state. What we are
doing is taking away personal responsibility from people and giving
them out and out payments for loans that they take out that they don't
need to take out.
Economists are not going to tell us that money spent on education is
a good investment, and the government doesn't invest money. The
government spends money. It is interesting to me that they brought out
the big guns for this bill and they say it is no new cost to taxpayers.
Well, every dollar we take away from taxpayers is a cost to them.
Why is tuition up 43 percent? We are looking at the wrong issue. As
long as the government keeps throwing money, then the institutions are
going to keep expanding what they charge. I have used myself as an
example before, but I know many people who have done this. They went to
college and never borrowed a dime. They were as poor as could be.
We should call this the new Democrat welfare bill. It is a Trojan
horse. It is designed to fool the American people. We have used this
analogy before. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig,
and that is what this bill is. There is no need for this. There is no
need for people to go into debt to go to college in this country. There
are all kinds of choices for people. All we are doing is taking money
away from hardworking American people and creating new government
programs.
I am really concerned about the direction in which we are heading in
this country. The Democrats have never seen a welfare program they
didn't like. Republicans were able to decrease welfare costs when they
took over in this body in 1995. This is another attempt by the
Democrats to continue the welfare program.
I want Americans to have access to education. I have worked in
education all my life: school board member, university administrator,
college president. I have dealt with low-income students. This is not
the way to do it. We don't need a return to the nanny state.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15
seconds
[[Page H7537]]
to say that I find it unbelievable that Republicans would decide that
families that are making every sacrifice to borrow money, and students
that are making every sacrifice to borrow and pay back money, that
somehow they are called welfare recipients. These are hardworking
American families who are struggling to educate their children, and I
want to disassociate myself from that kind of characterization of these
families or these students.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr.
Kennedy).
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, I rise for a colloquy with the gentleman
from California.
As I understand, an important provision in this bill is a loan
forgiveness program for individuals serving in high-need professions.
One of those is child and adolescent mental health professionals.
Do I understand the chairman in helping me secure this program in the
overall bill so that we can bring more professionals into this area?
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I want to thank the gentleman for
bringing this to our attention, and we look forward to continuing to
work with him on this issue.
As he has pointed out to this committee and many Members of Congress,
we in fact have a workforce crisis, and that is what we have tried to
address in the loan forgiveness program in those professions that are
not necessarily the highest paying in our society but are essential to
the well-being of our society. We will work with the gentleman as this
bill proceeds through the legislative process on this matter.
Mr. KENNEDY. Suicide is the third leading cause of death for young
people. Too many people are waiting in our juvenile detention
facilities all across America. It is causing a disruption in education
all across this country. We need more child and adolescent mental
health professionals if we are going to have an education system, and I
thank the gentleman for helping us get more of those professionals in
the field so we can move forward with their education.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman from Rhode
Island and look forward to continuing to work with him on this issue in
this conference and also on the Higher Education Act.
Mr. KENNEDY. I thank the chairman of the committee.
I'd like to thank Chairman Miller for his leadership in bringing to
the floor the largest single investment in college financial aid since
the GI Bill.
The bill we are considering here increases the maximum Pell Grant by
$500. It will cut the interest rate on student loans in half.
It provides loan forgiveness for college graduates that agree to
teach in high-need areas and who agree to go into public service
professions. It accomplishes all of that, and yet here is the best
part: this bill saves the American taxpayers $750 million.
By reducing the excessive subsidies that Congress has lavished on
private lenders, lenders that we have seen in the news this year have
acted unscrupulously time and again, Chairman Miller has more than paid
for the investments he is making in our students.
I know that my constituents in Rhode Island who take out Federal
students loans will appreciate the $4,420 in savings this bill provides
to them. And I also know that the rest of my constituents will
appreciate the fact that this increase in student aid does not cost
them one extra dime.
When Democrats took control in Congress, we promised to cut student
loan interest rates in half, while at the same time proceeding in a
fiscally responsible fashion. Today, we are fulfilling that promise. I
will be proud to vote in favor of this bill, and I urge my colleagues
to do the same.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hare), a member of the committee.
Mr. HARE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2669, the
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007. By passing this bill today, we make
the largest single investment in higher education since the 1944 GI
bill.
College costs have grown nearly 40 percent in just the last 5 years,
and too many students have found themselves drowning in debt or, worse,
unable to afford an education at all. I believe education is an
investment, not an expenditure. This bill will increase our Nation's
competitiveness and allow Americans from all economic backgrounds to
achieve the dream of a college career.
This act would make need-based student loans more easily accessible
and provide for additional mandatory funding for the Pell Grant
scholarship, benefiting nearly 230,000 students in my home State of
Illinois.
The bill also cuts the interest rate on subsidized student loans in
half over the next 5 years and includes tuition assistance for students
who teach in the Nation's public schools and loan forgiveness for
college graduates who go into public service professions. I urge my
colleagues to join us in supporting H.R. 2669.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for acknowledging me.
I am happy to rise in support of this bill here today. A conversation I
heard a short while ago from my colleagues that there are some people
in America who are taking welfare and don't need to have public
assistance to go on to college are probably not thinking of the same
America that I am thinking of.
I am thinking of the America where college costs have gone up 41
percent after inflation, and that is just for public higher education.
I am thinking of the America where parents are working two jobs on many
occasions, the students are working, and they still can't afford the
cost of a public higher education.
I am thinking of the America that has not raised the value of a Pell
Grant for many, many years, and we have a chance here to do just that.
I am looking at a bill and supporting a bill that in fact will raise
the Pell Grants, is going to lower the interest rate on student loans,
both of which are necessary for many, many families in this country. I
am talking for businesses as well as families. This is a chance not
just to help the individuals, but to help our economy.
We all are very happy to talk about the need, to really have the
college-educated populace out there so we can be competitive globally.
This is our opportunity to put our money where our mouth is. This is a
good piece of work. I congratulate the chairman for getting this
through and look forward to passing this bill in the whole House.
{time} 1330
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr. George
Miller) has 13\1/4\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from California
(Mr. McKeon) has 7\3/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), a senior member of the committee.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, and I'd like to share
an alternative Republican viewpoint on the bill before us this
afternoon. Traditionally, Republicans have stood for budgetary
responsibility and competition to ensure a good return on taxpayer
investment in Federal programs. I believe that this bill, while not
perfect, is something that any Republican who stands for these
principles should support.
For many years, I have spoken out against the excess subsidies that
taxpayers pay to lenders in the guaranteed loan program. Government and
private economists, including those in the Office of Management and
Budget, the Congressional Budget Office, the Government Accountability
Office and the Treasury Department, have all confirmed the significant
inefficiencies in the program due to the arbitrary and capricious
nature in which lender subsidies have been set over the last 40 years.
In fact, these scorekeepers have found that taxpayers spend $3 to $5
billion each year on unnecessary subsidies that could be better applied
as direct aid to students. The status quo on lender subsidies is
inefficient, wasteful and unacceptable, and I applaud the effort made
in this bill to redirect these resources primarily as Pell Grants and
interest rate reductions.
This bill also contains two other critically important provisions
that
[[Page H7538]]
largely have been overlooked in this debate. First, it includes an
amendment that I offered and which was unanimously adopted in committee
to study and implement a pilot program using market-based reforms, such
as auctions, to bring down the cost to taxpayers in the guaranteed loan
program. The reason we find ourselves needing to redirect these
subsidies in the first place is due to the fact that Congress set
subsidy rates blindly and irresponsibly, not based on any market
considerations.
As a free-market Republican, I believe Congress has no business
setting lender returns. Other mechanisms, such as auctions, will
actually capture market demands to obtain the optimal rate for
taxpayers and for lenders. Given the tremendous waste, fraud and
unethical relationships that have been uncovered in this program over
the last 6 months, it's clear that the guaranteed loan program is
fundamentally and structurally flawed. This study and pilot are key to
comprehensively reforming this program to ensure it serves students and
taxpayers. And I'd like to thank the chairman and the committee for
their strong support for this important effort.
Further, this bill applies a small portion of the savings towards
improving income-contingent student loan repayment. Earlier this year,
I introduced the IDEA Act, H.R. 2465, to make key changes to our
current, limited income-contingent loan repayment program. The bill
would make this repayment model accessible to all borrowers and better
address the growing debt burdens which our students are graduating
with. Some of my colleagues may be surprised to learn that this
repayment model was actually developed by free-market economist Milton
Friedman as the optimal way for all students, no matter their income,
to repay their student loans.
The College Cost Reduction Act includes several provisions included
in my legislation to improve this program, such as a 15 percent cap on
adjusted income payments and moving the floor from 100 to 150 percent
of the poverty level. These are positive first steps towards
implementing a viable income-contingent repayment program, and I hope
my colleagues will consider cosponsoring the IDEA Act to develop a loan
repayment system for the 21st century.
I thank my colleague for yielding me this time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis), a member of the committee who
had a major amendment in this legislation.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of
reducing the cost of higher education and increasing access for all of
those who dream of attending college, and that includes, Mr. Speaker,
our servicemembers.
Our servicemembers face extraordinary challenges when activated to go
to Iraq or Afghanistan while in college.
Under current law, those deciding not to return to school must begin
to repay the loan immediately after returning home, and this means, as
we all know, that they will receive their student loan bills in the
mail within days of returning from a combat zone.
Among the other benefits in this bill, the College Cost Reduction Act
includes an amendment to give those activated while in college a 13-
month deferment before they must begin repaying a student loan.
This bill is important, and it's important for this reason, because
it provides our servicemembers the protections and the rights they
deserve when activated while in college.
I urge my colleagues to support the overall legislation.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman
for her amendment, and I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey) a member of the committee.
(Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, every single American, no matter what
circumstances he or she comes from, deserves the opportunity to earn a
college degree, but this opportunity should not come at the cost of
years of crippling financial debt. That's why the time has come for
this Congress to ease the education burden by increasing Pell Grants,
reducing interest rates and closing the gap between college costs and
financial aid.
For the fifth time in 6 years, the college system in California
raised tuition. In fact, this fall, students at Sonoma State University
in my district will be required to pay nearly $3,000 more a year in
tuition. That's a 10 percent increase from their current tuition.
We need to do better. We need to work with our colleges to keep costs
low. We need to invest in financial aid, and today, we are finally
doing that.
And it's going to cost $18 billion to help this financial aid
increase; $18 billion, about the same as 6 weeks of our occupation in
Iraq.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), a member of the committee.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California and
congratulate him and thank him for developing this legislation.
We've outlined many of the provisions of the bill today. I would just
point out that this will result in more than $250 million in additional
loan and Pell grant aid to New Jersians. I'm also pleased that this
legislation includes provisions from my bill, the Part-Time Student
Assistance Act, that will make Pell Grants available year-round instead
of the current two semesters a year, and this is important for students
who work and go to school.
Also, we have raised the income protection allowance in the College
Cost Reduction Act so that students who will have to work to support
themselves and their families can earn more without having that count
against their student aid.
The bill also includes provisions from my bill, the National Security
Language Act. This provides $5,000 in loan forgiveness for Federal
employees with critical foreign language skills.
The bill also provides upfront grant aid for those who are becoming
math, science and foreign language teachers. Without qualified teachers
in these areas, we're endangering the competitiveness of our children
in the global economy.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder), a member of the committee.
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, this is a truly historic debate on the
difference of philosophy of government. We agree on much of what's in
this bill. In fact, my friend from Texas, Congressman Ron Paul, is a
purist, capitalist, libertarian, but in fact, we've always had a
blended government.
And the question is, whether it's through tax incentives, direct
spending or loans, we've had a blended economy from the days of
building canals and from our beginning; the question is, which way are
we going to tilt? Is it going to be a capitalist tilt, or is the tilt
going to be government running this?
I believe, and I understand that likely today I'm going to lose, I'm
going to be on the losing side, but I want to go on record pointing out
how in fact extreme this bill is.
There is a section, a provision of this bill, however well-
intentioned, that reverses the normal role of trying to balance what
you purchase with your ability to repay. It's an income-based section
133 open-ended entitlement benefit, regardless of profession, that
allows them to cap the maximum loan payment each year at 150 percent of
discretionary income and have the remainder of the loan forgiven after
20 years.
Under the bill, this means a typical entry-level Hill staffer earning
$25,000 a year would never be forced to pay more than $120 a month on
their student loans. This would no doubt be popular to our staff, but
the American taxpayer I don't believe would approve of this.
An income-based repayment program would eliminate once and for all
any need for students to weigh their choice of college or university
against which type of career they plan to enter after the degree. It's
a disconnect with capitalism because you don't have to say, if I get
this number of degrees and go this far, how is my job going to repay
this? Should I go to a local campus?
[[Page H7539]]
Should I go to a lower priced college? It's disconnected now based from
your choice of employment.
While the government surely has a role in increasing access to
education, this program would totally strip any incoming college
student from making a responsible choice. It's kind-hearted but
reckless.
One final example to strengthen the point. Say someone leaves school
with an advanced degree and $120,000 of loan debt and takes a job
making a steady $65,000 a year. He or she, if they selected to become
part of this program, making $65,000 a year and made only minimum
monthly payments, using the current 6.8 percent interest rate, the
required monthly payment under the program would not even cover the
interest on the loan, so that, 20 years later, they would have their
$150,000 forgiven, even though they had been making $65,000 a year.
That's because the median income in the United States is only $46,000.
I believe that we should work with low-income students through Pell
Grants, and I support many parts of this bill in targeting, but when
you disconnect the economic decisions that you make on your graduate
degrees, on what profession and what college, it is State-controlled,
economic controlled, not capitalism.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono), a member of the committee.
(Ms. HIRONO asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the College Cost
Reduction Act, the largest increase in college aid since the GI bill,
and I especially thank Chairman Miller for his leadership.
This legislation will make college more affordable and accessible for
students in Hawaii and across America. It will do so at no new cost to
taxpayers.
Keeping America competitive requires an educated workforce prepared
for high-skilled jobs. Beyond preparing our youth for careers,
education is vital for the full development of an individual.
College costs have skyrocketed beyond the needs of many students and
their families, and as a result, students in Hawaii and elsewhere are
holding off going to college or skipping it all together, and those who
do attend college are taking on increasing amounts of debt.
So this bill is of critical importance because the hardworking
families I represent need this help.
I also want to mention a few other provisions in this legislation
that are very important to me. As a member of this committee, I worked
to increase funding for colleges and universities for native Hawaiians
and Alaska natives $30 million over the next 5 years. For this and many
other reasons, I rise in strong support of this measure.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have left?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon)
has 1\1/4\ minutes remaining, and the gentleman from California (Mr.
George Miller) has 9\1/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke), a member of the committee.
(Ms. CLARKE asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today
to give my enthusiastic support to the College Cost Reduction Act of
2007, H.R. 2669. I want to thank Chairman Miller for his leadership in
this matter.
In the advent of the 21st century, the question we must ask ourselves
is, what have we done to ensure the success of our Nation, the
development of our civil society? Education has been and will always be
the portal for our advancement.
The cost of attending college has increased by 40 percent over the
past 5 years. As a result, students are graduating with more debt than
ever and postponing enrollment or avoiding college all together because
they just can't afford it. This legislation is a much-needed sigh of
relief for traditional college students, working families and adult
learners in my home district in Brooklyn, New York, and across this
Nation.
The College Cost Reduction Act cuts interest rates in half on
subsidized student loans over the next 5 years, increases the amount of
Federal loans available to students, and so I ask your enthusiastic
support for this groundbreaking legislation.
{time} 1345
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), a member of the committee.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this
investment in America. In spite of what we have heard from the other
side about a spending plan, what we are really looking at is an
investment in education, for those individuals who, without it, would
never have an opportunity to experience a college education.
I have heard some things that I thought were unimaginable this
afternoon. Eighty percent of the students in my district who attend the
University of Illinois rely upon financial aid.
This legislation provides money for Historically Black Colleges and
Universities that are falling apart, many of them, at the seams,
Hispanic-serving institutions. Individuals who would never, ever get an
opportunity to go to college and experience higher education will do so
as a result of this legislation, this investment in America. I thank
the chairman for a great bill, and I urge its passage.
First let me express my sincere appreciation to Chairman Miller, and
Subcommittee Chairman Hinojosa for their efforts in introducing this
landmark legislation to Congress. In my tenure as a Congressional
representative for the citizens of the 7th District of Illinois, this
is one of, if not the most critical national policy initiative for
which I have been able to advocate. Why? Because in my district for
example, approximately 80 percent of the students attending the
University of Illinois rely on financial aid programs to support their
education, and this bill provides the single largest increase in
college aid to students across the country since the GI Bill.
The College Cost Reduction Act increases the maximum Pell Grant
scholarship by at least $500 over the next 5 years, and I am pleased
that an amendment which I cosponsored added $900,000,000 to the pool;
invests in Upward Bound, a proven effective program that empowers
students with the resources they need to help them succeed as they
pursue higher education; and invests substantial appropriations in
historically Black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving
institutions, tribally controlled, Native and predominately black
institutions and American and Asian American Pacific institutions.
Detractors will try to paint this as another spending boondoggle by
the Democrats, but this bill benefits students and families at no new
cost to taxpayers by cutting excess subsidies the Federal government
pays to lenders in the student loan industry.
Some may ask why we didn't just focus on Pell Grants, but the fact
remains that families who don't qualify for Pell Grants still need
assistance paying for college costs, and that approximately 50 percent
of students who do qualify for Pell Grants borrow money to pay for
college costs. The College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 is the national
policy initiative which demonstrates that America recognizes its
responsibility to provide an educational environment that inspires and
supports the pursuit of academic excellence.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney), a member of the committee.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this measure.
I come from the district in Connecticut that's the home of the
University of Connecticut, Eastern Connecticut State University, three
community colleges, Conn. College, Mitchell College. We are the higher
ed district of the State of Connecticut. New loan assistance and aid
through grants in the amount of $130 million will be coming to
Connecticut as a result of this measure being passed, which, again, is
great news for my district.
Frankly, this bill is about something more than just parochial
priorities, which are very important to my district. It's also about
the change of direction that this new Congress is keeping faith with
with passage of this legislation.
When I campaigned last year as a challenger in the closest race in
America, the decision of the last Congress to take $12 billion out of
the higher education account and use it to raise interest rates on
student loans for the
[[Page H7540]]
purpose of making sure that the Paris Hilton stratum of American
society was going to get their tax cuts was a perfect symbol for how
out of touch the prior Congress was with the needs of America.
Passing this legislation will keep faith with the voters who had the
courage to vote for change.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez), a member of the
committee.
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong
support of the College Cost Reduction Act.
Students from working families, especially those who are the first in
their families to attend college, face many obstacles.
For example, there is no one at home to say the SATs aren't that
difficult or that tricky; or that financial aid forms aren't going to
be a nightmare to fill out; or that taking out a student loan isn't as
scary as it might seem.
The high cost of college is, of course, the biggest obstacle. In
recent years, rising college tuitions have far outstripped inflation,
and the previous congressional majority failed to ensure that Pell
Grants kept up.
That's why I am proud to support this bill. It provides the single
largest investment in higher education since the GI Bill at no new cost
to taxpayers.
My mother and father, both immigrants who arrived in the U.S. with
little money, and not knowing English, raised seven children. With a
lot of hard work and sacrifice, all of us attended college and two even
made it into Congress.
What I really like about this bill is that it ensures that the doors
that were open to my brothers and sisters and me will stay open for the
young people of today and generations to come.
I urge support for this inportant bill.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter), a member of the
committee.
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill.
Education is the key to prosperity in our Nation, and we have always
known that. When our troops returned home during World War II, they
became eligible for the GI Bill, which built the middle class in this
country.
Today we have the opportunity to once again invest in America in our
next generation. This is the key to competitiveness. It's the key to
the global economy, to make sure that our people will be able to work
in the world and to prosper. It is our honor to be able to present this
without raising any, any taxes on the American taxpayer.
In my State of New Hampshire alone, over 15,000 students will benefit
from this increase; 1,500 more New Hampshire students will qualify for
Pell Grants. We have a wonderful opportunity to invest in our Nation
and our next generation, and to strengthen the middle class.
It is with great honor that I support this, and I thank the chairman
for bringing this bill to us.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes
to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).
Mr. PAYNE. I would like to begin by thanking Chairman Miller for his
leadership on this bill and certainly urge my colleagues to vote for
the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2669, the College Cost
Reduction Act of 2007. This legislation will provide the single largest
investment in college financial aid since the 1944 GI Bill, helping
millions of low- and middle-income students and families pay for
college.
This legislation would provide about $18 billion over the next 5
years in college financial aid at no cost to the United States
taxpayers, no new costs.
This new investment is critically important because college costs
have grown nearly 40 percent in the last 5 years. Students are
graduating from college with more debt than ever before. Many would-be
students are holding off going to college or skipping it altogether
because they do not believe they can afford it.
By boosting scholarship and reducing loan and tuition costs, the
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 makes an historic investment in
America's college students, its economic competitiveness and its
future, while maintaining fiscal responsibility.
I urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ross). The gentleman from California on
the Democratic side has 2\3/4\ minutes remaining, and the gentleman
from California on the Republican side has 1\1/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I think this has been a very interesting
debate.
At the beginning of the debate, I asked our colleagues to please
listen carefully for anything they might hear that would lower tuition
rates, that would lower the cost of a college education. I have
listened very carefully, and I haven't heard anything.
I have heard a lot of talk about investment, I have heard a lot of
talk about new spending, and a lot of these things sound wonderful. It
reminds me kind of when I would take my children to sit on Santa
Claus's knee. He would ask them what they want. They would tell him all
the wonderful things, and many times I wished I could have been Santa
Claus and just give them all that they wanted. Sometimes it comes back
to reality and the parents have to make some tough decisions based on
our budget.
I think people that are listening to this debate realize that there
is no free lunch. With all of the new programs, nine new entitlement
programs, somebody is going to have to pay for those.
I just entreat those who are watching to not create nine new
entitlements, to place the interests of colleges, universities,
graduates, philanthropic organizations above the needs of low-income
students. Let's not put this price on our children and our
grandchildren.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all of
the members of the committee for their work on this legislation on both
sides of the aisle. I certainly want to thank the staff as we finish
general debate.
Mr. Speaker, we said when we gained the majority in this Congress
that we wanted to take America in a new direction. This legislation, in
fact, does that.
For 6.8 million students who take out need-based loans, this
legislation will allow for cutting the interest rate in half over the
next 5 years for those students. That will save them almost $4,400 on
the average debt that they graduate with. For almost 5.5 million
students who rely on a Pell Grant for the basic cost of their
education, this means that over the next 4 years that grant will
increase by some $500, definitely a new direction.
Because what we saw in the past was the Republicans made it more
expensive to pay for your student loans. They provided little or no
contribution to the Pell Grant over the last 4 or 5 years. That is a
new direction.
What does it mean to America? It means that we are investing in the
students and the talent of the future. It means that these are the
young people that will take their talents and provide the next
generation of discovery, the next generation of innovation, the next
generation of jobs in America, the next generation of economic activity
here at home. That's the investment that was made by our grandparents
back in 1944, in that generation, the first generation to go to college
in such great numbers with the GI Bill, and that's the investment that
we have the courage and the vision to make in this generation of young
people for the future of this country.
That's what this legislation is about. It's about making sure that
the doors of a higher education that every employer tells us is now
necessary to come to the American workplace if you want a career and
you want a decent wage and you want to be able to provide for your
family. The doors to those higher education institutions, be they
community colleges, State colleges, universities or elite universities,
however you want to characterize them, that those doors will not be
closed to people who are talented and ready and qualified to go to
college.
This legislation provides the means to ensure their access to help
them pay for it and to help them make sure that they don't have to make
choices against their best interest because of
[[Page H7541]]
that debt and later in life that they can choose to go into the
professions that serve us as a society. This is a dramatic departure, a
dramatic departure from the status quo, a dramatic departure.
What the Republicans did, when they had a chance, they had $20
billion. They decided they would help pay for the tax cuts to the
wealthiest people in the country. That's what they did with a big chunk
of the money that they took from these excess subsidies, the subsidies
that we are taking a way from the banks.
The entitlement program that the banks have today as we stand here
will be changed. Yes, it will become an entitlement program for
America's families, America's students, those most at need in this
country. That's what this Congress ought to be doing. That's what this
society wants us to do, and we're going to do it today when we pass
this legislation.
Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2669, the
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007.
This historic piece of legislation is the relief our working families
have been waiting for and I am proud to stand with this Democratic-led
Congress to make college educations more accessible for our youth.
Housing, gas, food, utilities, and health insurance prices are going
through the roof. Our middle-class parents are working overtime to keep
up with the cost of living and hopefully save for retirement.
It has become increasingly difficult for our families to save for
college. With tuition prices increasing an average of 3.5 percent each
year, American families are facing an uphill battle.
As a result, more and more of our children are coming out of school
with staggering amounts of debt and many are being forced to attend
part-time in order to work and pay for books and student fees.
In my home State of California, the average 4-year public school
student will walk away with over $15,000 in debt after graduation. This
is not how we should be sending our youth into the workforce.
H.R. 2669 is going to slash the interest rates on student loans,
saving the average American student about $4,400 in interest payments
over the life of their loan.
Furthermore, we're going to help our families take on less student
debt by making Pell Grants keep up with the real cost of tuition.
During the Republican-controlled Congress, the maximum Pell Grant
amount remained unchanged at $4,050 since 2003. H.R. 2669 is going to
increase that figure to $4,310 in 2007 alone. By next year, it will be
$4,900 and by 2011, it will be $5,200.
In my home State of California, over 600,000 Pell Grant recipients
stand to benefit from the legislation we're going to pass today.
That means our children will be in a better position to save for
retirement, become homeowners, and contribute to the economy.
H.R. 2669 will also make landmark investments to our minority serving
institutions. Black, Hispanic, Tribal, Native Hawaiian, and Asian-
Pacific Islander-serving institutions stand to receive $500 million in
aid to teach and equip our minority youth, particularly in the science,
technology, engineering, and math fields.
H.R. 2669 provides an additional $228 million for Upward Bound, which
will fund 188 additional programs to help prepare low-income, first
generation students for college.
Finally, H.R. 2669 will provide loan forgiveness for students who
pursue careers as public school teachers. Each would receive up-front
tuition assistance of $4,000 per year, to a maximum of $16,000. This
will provide aid to at least 21,500 undergraduate and graduate students
who commit to teaching a high-need subject in high-need schools for
four years.
As the youngest of 15 children, I was the first in my family to
attend college. I can tell you from personal experience that it has
made all the difference in the world.
I worked hard to get through school and I'm grateful for the
assistance I received to complete my education. And it's time for the
government to step up and give our children the same support.
The College Cost Reduction Act is the kind of reform my constituents
need and I am proud to support this legislation. I urge my colleagues
to do the same and support H.R. 2669.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2669, The
College Cost Reduction Act. I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes''
on the largest investment in student aid since the passage of the GI
bill.
The College Cost Reduction Act re-affirms the fundamental federal
interest in higher education--ensuring that students and families have
access to the financial and other supports they need to achieve a
college education.
The fundamental guaranty in our student aid programs is not to
protect lucrative lines of business in the lending industry; it is a
guaranty of college access for students. When we lose sight of this
core principle, we lose our way as we have seen with the recent
scandals in the student loan industry.
H.R. 2669 is about guaranteeing access. This legislation increases
student financial aid on an order of magnitude we have not seen in more
than a generation. It invests in our public servants and in our
teachers. It brings the private sector and charitable organizations to
the table to leverage resources so that more first generation, low-
income college students can realize their full potential.
I am particularly proud of our work to strengthen the institutions
that are the gateways of access to higher education for minority
students. Through this amendment we will commit to investing one-half
billion dollars over 5 years in hispanic-serving institutions,
historically black colleges and universities, predominantly black
institutions, tribally-controlled Colleges and Universities, Native
Alaskan and Native Hawaiian serving Institutions, and institutions that
serve Asian and Pacific Islanders. This represents a doubling of the
current investment in the strengthening and developing institutions
programs in Titles III and V of the Higher Education Act.
Many on the other side will say that we are investing in institutions
and not students. They will rail against new entitlement spending.
These arguments reflect a fundamental lack of understanding of the
communities that will fuel the growth in our workforce. Worse, they
indicate an unwillingness to invest in those communities.
HSls, HBCUs, and other minority-serving institutions are only going
to grow in their importance for ensuring that our Nation continues to
have enough college graduates to fill the jobs in our knowledge-based
economy. The 2007 Condition of Education reports that 42 percent of our
public school children are racial or ethnic minorities--one in five is
Hispanic.
These students face many challenges.
Seventy percent of black 4th graders, 73 percent of Hispanic 4th
graders, and 65 percent of Native American 4th graders are eligible for
free and reduced priced lunches. These students are also concentrated
in our highest poverty public schools where over 75 percent of the
students are from low-income families.
These schools are the focus of the No Child Left Behind Act. They are
the feeder schools to our Title III and Title V institutions. It is in
our national interest to strengthen the capacity of these institutions
to serve their communities. It is a worthy investment.
I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 2669.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
the College Cost Reduction Act.
I want to commend Chairman Miller on this legislation, which provides
the single largest investment in higher education since the GI bill--at
no new cost to taxpayers.
I am proud that this Democratic Congress has tackled the college cost
crisis: the time to act is now. Over the last 5 years, college costs
have grown by nearly 40 percent. Students across the country are
graduating with more and more debt. In my home state of New York, the
typical student with need-based loans graduates from 4-year public
schools with over $14,000 in debt. And each year nearly 200,000
students in our country hold off on attending college, or opt out
altogether, simply because they cannot afford to go.
This historic bill would make college more affordable by cutting
interest rates on subsidized student loans in half over the next 5
years. In New York, this means an average student saves $4,570 over the
life of their loan.
It will also increase the purchasing power of the Pell Grant
Scholarship, upping the maximum scholarship by at least $500 over the
next 4 years and ultimately reaching a maximum scholarship of at least
$5,200 by 2011. In New York, this increased purchasing power could
directly help over 420,000 students.
Under the College Cost Reduction Act, students from New York and all
across the country will be better able to achieve their goals and reach
their dreams. Our Nation and our economy also benefit when we
strengthen the middle class by making college more affordable. I am
proud to cast my vote for this historic bill, which makes a tremendous
step towards ensuring that no one is denied the opportunity to go to
college simply because of the price.
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2669 (the College
Cost Reduction Act of 2007), a bill that is good for students and good
for the Federal budget. Our budget resolution for fiscal year 2008
included reconciliation instructions for the House Committee on
Education and Labor to cut its spending by $750 million by 2012, and
this bill more than fulfills that target. In fact, this reconciliation
bill will reduce the Federal Government's budget
[[Page H7542]]
deficit by $2.8 billion over the next 5 years while investing billions
of dollars in making college more affordable for millions of students.
One of the first actions of the 110th Congress was to institute a
tough pay-as-you-go rule in the House that requires all changes to
mandatory spending and revenues to be offset so that they do not lower
the budget's bottom line. The rule was necessary to help restore fiscal
balance, and it requires Congress to make tough choices about
priorities. This bill adheres to the pay-as-you-go rule--with net
savings of $2.8 billion over the 2007-2012 period and even greater
savings over 2007-2017--while also providing needed improvements in
student loans and grant aid.
Like previous reconciliation bills, the College Cost Reduction Act
includes some new resources that are more than offset by cuts
elsewhere. All of the new resources in the bill will make college more
affordable, either by lowering the cost of loans--up-front or through
forgiveness after graduation--or by increasing the amount of grant aid
available. But none of these resources will increase the deficit: the
bill not only complies with our pay-as-you-go rule and the
reconciliation directive but actually reduces the deficit by $2.8
billion over the next 5 years.
To pay for these student benefits, the bill reduces the extra
subsidies that the government pays to banks. These reductions are
similar to those in H.R. 5, which passed the House in January by a
bipartisan vote of 356-71, and to the subsidy cuts in the President's
2008 budget proposal. But the student loan business will continue to be
an attractive one for banks, which are still guaranteed to receive 95
percent of unpaid principal on any defaulted loan and still receive a
subsidy from the Federal Government on each loan they provide.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 2269, the College Cost
Reduction Act of 2007, the single largest investment in college
financial aid since the 1944 GI bill. This legislation will help
millions of middle- and low-income families and students pay for
college without any new cost to taxpayers. At a time of skyrocketing
tuition costs, government investment has not kept up. As college
degrees become more expensive, we must help keep bright students in
school and ensure a bright future for America.
The legislation boosts college financial aid by about $18 billion
over the next 5 years, and pays for itself by reducing excessive
federal subsidies paid to lenders in the college loan industry by $19
billion. Over the course of 5 years, almost 70,000 Oregon students
would benefit from an additional $194 million in available loans and
Pell Grants. The average Oregon student graduates with more than
$14,000 in debt, and this legislation would cut by almost $5,000 the
interest paid on their loans. By investing in our students, we ensure a
well-educated, globally competitive workforce. We also benefit our
communities by providing incentives for our brightest to go into public
service jobs and into our neediest schools.
I am proud to be part of this new Congress that prioritizes
education, making it feasible for all families to send their kids to
college, and keeping America competitive.
Mr. MICHAUD. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support the College Cost
Reduction Act of 2007. This legislation will provide the single largest
investment in higher education since the GI bill, helping low- and
middle-income students and families pay for college.
Unfortunately, too many Maine students do not obtain a postsecondary
education because they cannot afford the dramatically escalating costs
of higher education. This legislation is a historic opportunity to put
education goals within reach for many students by increasing funding
for Pell Grants, cutting interest rates on subsidized student loans,
and increasing funding for Upward Bound.
While there are provisions within the underlying bill to protect
small lenders, I will continue to work hard to ensure that the small
lenders in Maine, including the Finance Authority of Maine (FAME), are
protected in the final legislation. FAME has provided many Maine
students the opportunity to go on to postsecondary education and it's
important to ensure that they, and other small lenders, are able to
continue to provide the best service possible for Maine students.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2669,
the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007. Not since 1944, with the GI
Bill, has Congress taken such a proactive step in ensuring that
millions of Americans can attend higher education institutes.
It is time to start providing our students with the aid needed to
keep America competitive by strengthening the middle class and
increasing diversity on our campuses. H.R. 2669 will allow middle class
and minority families to have access to quality education by increasing
grant aid and lessening the burden of loans. Along with H.R. 5, this
legislation ensures that our students will finally have the funding for
higher education that has long been denied them.
This bill will increase the Pell Grant by $500, benefiting 646,000
students in my home state of California. In addition, 6.8 million
students nationwide who take out need-based federal student loans would
see the interest rates cut in half, providing California alone with
over $1.4 billion more in loan and Pell aid. H.R. 2669 not only puts
and keeps students in college--it strengthens our communities by
providing financial assistance to people entering public service
careers, like nurses, police, firefighters, first responders, and
teachers.
For students in Los Angeles, this is real dollars in the pockets of
those who need it most. Since 1980 the Latino population in the United
States has doubled, but Latinos attending college has only increased 5
percent during this same period. Latinos continue to face numerous
obstacles on the road to college. Low family incomes, low financial aid
awards and a reluctance to assume debt has hindered Latinos for too
long in achieving their higher education goals. The College Cost
Reduction Act helps support those institutions helping Latino students
by guaranteeing $500 million over 5 years for Hispanic-Serving
Institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Tribal
Colleges.
Financial assistance was critical to my ability to obtain a higher
education and I am proud that H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction Act
of 2007, will help Latinos and other low income students get the
financial security to pursue their dreams. I strongly support this
legislation that invests in our students, our communities and our
Nation.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the road to a better society is
paved with better education. H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction Act
of 2007, is the single largest investment in higher education since the
GI bill and highlights the commitment of this Congress to making
college more affordable. By making this investment in our students, we
are investing in the future of our country.
This landmark legislation will provide vital assistance to low- and
middle-income students by increasing the Pell Grant Scholarship by $500
over the next 5 years. In the State of Texas alone, over 470,000 could
benefit from this increase.
H.R. 2669 will also encourage philanthropic participation in college
financing through matching grants aimed at increasing the number of
first generation and low-income college students.
By passing this bill we will be making great strides on behalf of
minority students. The College Cost Reduction Act invests $500 million
in minority serving institutions and creates two new designations--
Predominately Black Institutions and Institutions Serving Asian
Americans and Pacific Islanders. By recognizing these institutions, we
recognize their commitment and dedication to serving our minority
students.
Mr. Speaker, I believe in an America where every child should grow up
knowing that if they study and work hard, that they will have the
opportunity to achieve the American Dream.
I believe in an America where the circumstances into which you are
born do not determine whether you will one day stand in front of family
and friends as you receive a college diploma.
I commend Chairman Miller and our Democratic Leadership for their
continued commitment to ensuring that a college education is not out of
reach for low- and middle-income Americans.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2669, the
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007.
In 2004, a report by Michigan's Lt. Governor John Cherry's Commission
on Higher Education and Economic Growth laid out how two-thirds of the
jobs created in the next decade will require post-secondary education
and training. There is little debate that Michigan's economic future is
directly linked to our ability to accelerate the completion of degrees
in higher education.
Despite increasing costs across the country and in our state, our
federal investment in higher education has faltered. Direct grant aid,
which once made up roughly 60 percent of the federal government's
student aid contribution has dropped to 40 percent, with the remaining
60 percent offered through loans. The real dollar value of Pell Grants
has sunk in recent years, while the average college graduate is now
faced with close to $17,500 in debt. For lower and middle income
students and families these costs are simply too great, forcing nearly
200,000 to delay or postpone their college dreams because of the
prohibitive costs.
It has become increasingly clear that the failure of the federal
government to adequately invest in higher education will have effects
beyond college accessibility. In 2005, the National Academies of
Sciences released a report entitled ``Rising Above the Gathering
Storm'' which expressed deep concern that our country is losing its
competitive advantage in science and technology research, two fields
that are critical to our economic leadership.
[[Page H7543]]
The seriousness of our higher education crisis necessitates a
comprehensive response of dramatic proportions. The College Cost
Reduction Act of 2007 rises to this challenge by investing $18 billion
over the next 5 years in higher education, the single largest
investment in college financial aid since the GI Bill in 1944.
The maximum Pell Grant is boosted $500 to $5,200--up from just $4,050
in 2006--with its eligibility expanded to more students. TEACH grants
are established to provide $4,000 per year for high-achieving students
who commit to teach in high-need schools or high-need fields--like math
and science. The interest rates for need-based student loans would be
halved.
In Michigan, over 200,000 students could see benefits from the Pell
increases and about 144,000 student borrowers with subsidized loans
would see savings of over $4,200 on average over the life of their
loans. This bill provides close to $513 million in loans and grants to
Michigan's students and families.
The investments in this bill maintain the commitment made by this
Democratic Congress to fiscal responsibility. The bill is fully offset
by trimming excessive federal subsidies to lenders in the college loan
industry. Not only will this not cost taxpayers a dime, it includes
$750 million over 5 years to pay down our national deficit.
The College Cost Reduction Act meets the mounting hurdle of higher
education affordability with vigorous across-the-board grant aid and
loan investments. It shows the commitment by this Congress to the
availability of a college education and the importance of this
education to our economic competitiveness. Improving access to higher
education is vital to expanding opportunity for Michigan students and
building Michigan's economic future. This has to be an ongoing priority
for the federal government and this legislation is an important step in
the right direction. With this legislation, Congress has stepped up to
the plate to ensure a better future for our students, their families
and our country.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I have always believed students must have
the opportunity to earn degrees based on their academic accomplishments
rather than on their economic situation. Today's economy demands a
highly educated work force, which is why Congress must ensure we are
providing educational access to every qualified student that wants to
attend college. H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction Act, will do just
that by making the single largest investment in college financial aid
since the 1944 GI Bill.
I have heard from many of my constituents that the daunting costs of
a college education are preventing them from achieving a college
degree. They are not alone. Nearly 200,000 students are holding off on
going to college or forgoing college completely because they can't
afford it. In the last 5 years tuition at 4-year public colleges has
grown by 35 percent, forcing both students and their families to take
on increasing amounts of debt to pay for college. At a time when
Michigan's economy and workforce is struggling, a college education
should not be a luxury that is unreachable for middle-class families.
When the Democrats took the majority this year, we committed to
making college more affordable and accessible. H.R. 2669 will do this
by cutting the interest rate from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent over the
next 5 years. Each year 6.8 million students take out need-based loans
and accrue thousands of dollars of debt while completing their college
degree. This legislation will cut in half the interest rates on their
loans, saving the average student--with $13,800 in need-based student
loan debt--$4,400 over the life of the loan.
H.R. 2669 will also increase the maximum value of the Pell Grant
scholarship by $500 over the next 5 years, ultimately reaching a
maximum scholarship level of $5,200. As the Federal Government's single
largest source of grant aid for college students, this proposed
increase will directly benefit over 5 million low- and moderate-income
students.
More importantly, this legislation will prevent student borrowers
from facing unmanageable levels of Federal student debt by guaranteeing
borrowers will never have to spend more than 15 percent of their yearly
discretionary income on loan repayments and by allowing borrowers who
enter public service to have their loans forgiven after 10 years. This
is critically important because students today are graduating from
college with more debt than ever before.
Many people may be asking how this will help those who are struggling
in Michigan. In our great State of Michigan, over 143,000 students take
out need-based loans each year. The average student has $13,256 in
need-based student loan debt. H.R. 2669 will provide interest rate cuts
that win save each Michigan student $4,240 over the life of their
student loan. This legislation will also provide $513 million in
increased loan and Pell Grant aid to students and families in Michigan
over the next five years--benefiting over 200,000 students.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation not only because
it will increase college affordability, but because it will help our
workforce. Our economy depends on aggressive investment in our
workforce if we want to continue to be competitive in a global economy.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation, showing
American families that Congress is committed to investing in higher
education.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Speaker, I ask permission to revise and extend my
remarks.
I rise in support of the College Cost Reduction Act, the largest
increase in college aid since the G.I. bill, and I thank especially
Chairman Miller for his leadership.
This legislation will make college more affordable and more
accessible for students in Hawai`i and across America.
It will do so at no new cost to taxpayers.
Keeping America competitive requires an educated workforce prepared
for high skilled jobs.
Beyond preparing our youth for careers, education is vital for the
full development of an individual.
College costs have skyrocketed beyond the means of many students and
their families. As a result, many students in Hawai`i and elsewhere are
holding off on going to college or skipping it altogether. And those
who do attend college are taking on increasing amounts of debt, so this
bill is of critical importance to the hard-working families I
represent.
I also want to mention a few other provisions in this legislation
that are especially important to me: As a member of the Education and
Labor Committee, I worked to increase funding for colleges and
universities serving Native Hawaiians and Alaska Natives by $30 million
over the next 5 years.
We also included a $10 million investment in institutions serving
Asian and Pacific Islander populations that historically have had low
education attainment.
This legislation includes the provisions from my Early Educator Loan
Forgiveness bill that provides college loan forgiveness for graduates
who enter the field of early education to encourage more of them to
pursue this field.
For these reasons and more, I am proud to support this legislation.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2669,
the College Cost Reduction Act. I commend the Honorable George Miller
for introducing this much needed piece of legislation and for his
leadership on this issue and education in general.
As you all know, college costs in America are simply out of range for
far too many Americans. The University of the Virgin Islands, a
Historically Black University in my district, costs $10,000 per year
while the median income of a Virgin Islands resident is $32,613. One
does not have to be a rocket scientist to see the problem. It is
further amplified when examining my alma mater, the George Washington
University. Tuition at George Washington for an undergraduate starting
this fall will be $39,210 per year--a hefty sum when considering that
the median income of need-based federal loan borrowers in 2003-2004 was
$45,000.
This welcome legislation will raise the maximum value of the Pell
Grant Scholarship by $500, thus increasing its purchasing power and
benefiting roughly 5.5 million low- and moderate-income students. And
this is only the beginning.
The College Cost Reduction Act will also cut in half interest rates
on need-based student loans which so often become an unnecessary burden
over the heads of those just starting out in their respective
professions. In lowering the interest rates from 6.8 percent to 3.4
percent over the next five years, we are saving the average student
borrower $4,400 on their overall loan. The sad reality is that many
students from middle class homes miss out on obtaining a secondary
education because of a failure on our part. Many middle class students
have guardians that make too much money to qualify for Federal grants
but not enough to actually provide needed financial support.
Every one of our children and indeed every American strive to reach
the American dream. As their representatives, we must support them in
this pursuit by granting middle class Americans every opportunity
possible to obtain affordable higher education. This legislation will
expand eligibility of grants by almost 600,000 students, thus, helping
to end the unfair burden many students from middle class homes now
face.
Colleagues, I urge you to support this needed legislation. The
College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 will be the single largest increase
in secondary education support by the United States Government since
the GI Bill--and it will not cost the American tax payer one cent. Our
young people are America's future. It is critical that we invest in
that future.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the College
Cost Reduction Act of 2007. This bill provides the largest single
investment in higher education since the
[[Page H7544]]
Montgomery GI Bill of 1944, with no new cost to taxpayers.
Today, Federal financial aid programs fail to meet the needs of many
students. That means a college education is unattainable for many young
people. Public university students can only expect one-third of the
cost of attendance at a 4-year institution to be covered by the Pell
grant, down from two-thirds of the cost covered in 1980. This bill
makes higher education more affordable by increasing the maximum Pell
grant by $500 and increasing the number of eligible students by over
half a million. These improvements are long overdue.
In addition to strengthening Pell grants, this bill builds on other
existing Federal student aid programs to help provide our next
generation with a chance to succeed. It lowers Federal loan interest
rates to improve accessibility and ease the growing debt burden of
graduates. In 2004, one-fourth of all graduating students with loans
carried more than $25,000 in loan debt. Perversely, last year the
Republican-controlled Congress enacted the largest reduction ever to
Federal student aid programs to finance tax cuts for the rich. The
College Cost Reduction Act--H.R. 2669--begins to reverse failed
Republican policies by reducing the Federal interest rate on student
loans from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent over 5 years.
We must strengthen our education system if we hope to compete in a
global economy. In addition to making college more financially
feasible, careers in public service need to be rewarded. Quality
elementary and secondary teachers are essential to our public school
system, but in 2003-2004 their median salary was only $31,704. Teachers
deserve more than pats on the back. This bill provides upfront tuition
assistance for aspiring educators who commit to teaching high-need
subjects in underperforming schools.
This bill pays for itself by reducing some of the massive fees paid
to the scandal-plagued student loan industry. Instead of subsidizing
the profits of lenders, this bill puts money in the hands of low- and
middle-income students. Not surprisingly, President Bush is siding with
the big lenders and he's threatened to veto this essential legislation.
He and the Republicans in Congress continue to obstruct real progress
in education and almost every other domestic priority.
We must address the rising cost of higher education, reinvest in our
schools by attracting new teachers, and cultivate the next generation
of American leaders. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting
for America's future and supporting this bill.
Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation and
urge my colleagues to join me in voting for it.
As the first member of my family to graduate from college, I know
firsthand that affordable access to quality higher education is the key
to the American dream for working families. Unfortunately, college
costs have skyrocketed in recent years even as many fine colleges and
universities, like those in North Carolina, have gone to great lengths
to keep higher education affordable. The Federal Government has an
obligation to step up to the plate and provide more assistance, and
H.R. 2669 makes several important changes to the Federal student
financial assistance effort.
Specifically, H.R. 2669 would provide nearly $18 billion in college
financial aid at no new cost to the taxpayers. The bill would increase
the maximum Pell grant scholarship for low-income and moderate-income
students by $500 over the next 5 years. It would cut in half the
interest rate on need-based Federal student loans from 6.8 percent to
3.4 percent over 5 years. This will save the typical borrower some
$4,400 over the life of the loan. This provision alone could benefit
more than 162,000 students in North Carolina.
H.R. 2669 would make historic investments in Historically Black
Colleges and Universities--HBCUs--with $170 million in new grants for
HBCUs, such as Shaw University and Fayetteville State University, in my
congressional district. H.R. 2669 also would create a new designation
of Predominantly Black Institutions, which are defined as schools that
enroll students in financial need and have at least 40 percent African-
American student enrollment. These schools would be eligible to receive
$30 million in grant aid over 5 years for academic programs in the
fields of science, technology, engineering, health education, and
teacher education. This legislation would provide $228 million in
funding over 4 years for Upward Bound that increases high school
completion, college participation, and graduation rates among low-
income and first-generation college students.
I enthusiastically support the bill's tuition assistance for
excellent undergraduate students who agree to teach in the Nation's
public schools and its loan forgiveness for college graduates that go
into public service professions. In addition, H.R. 2669 would make
important new investments in science, technology, engineering and
mathematics--STEM--education that is so critical to our prosperity in
the global economy.
I want to thank Chairman Miller and his outstanding professional
staff, especially Gaby Gomez, Denise Forte, and Mark Zuckerman, for
working with me to help nonprofit lenders, like we have in North
Carolina. Specifically, this bill provides non-profit and small lenders
a significant boost to their bottom line earnings and their ability to
compete with for-profit lenders. These lenders will save $85 million in
the first year to re-invest in their college aid financing and nearly
$500 million over 5 years to serve students even better.
As the legislative process moves forward, I want to continue to work
with Chairman Miller to ensure that cuts to lender subsidies do not
result in North Carolina students paying more for their loans than they
do today. I am confident the final product will achieve that result,
and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting to pass H.R. 2669.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, this is such an exciting day. Today, we
say to the nearly 200,000 students every year who do not attend college
for financial reasons, you deserve better. You deserve better than
outdated financial aid packages, crippling debt, and empty promises of
support once you graduate. Today we are delivering on that promise.
Higher education has become increasingly important in this country
and around the world, yet it has been rapidly slipping from the grasp
of thousands and thousands of students every year. Over the past
several years, states have cut higher education funding and in many
cases, passed that cost on to students.
Student loans, which for two-thirds of our students average $20,000,
not only affect student's financial viability down the road, they
effect the range of opportunities that are available to new graduates
as they seek out professions that will enable them to repay their
loans. Education is supposed to be the gateway to opportunity, not the
path to financial ruin.
One of the most important provisions of H.R. 2669 is an expansion of
eligibility and an increase in the Pell grant scholarship to $5,200
over the next 5 years. This bill will also encourage and enable
graduates to go into the public service fields they're interested in--
and which our country so desperately needs--by providing loan
forgiveness for first responders, early childhood educators,
librarians, nurses, public defenders, and public prosecutors. These
professions are some of the most important to our communities, yet they
are chronically undersupported.
This bill will also provide tuition assistance to students who commit
to teaching in public schools, high-poverty communities, and high-need
subject areas. It also makes a landmark investment in Hispanic-Serving
Institutions and Tribally Controlled, Native or Predominately Black
Institutions.
By redirecting excessive Federal subsidies for lenders in the student
loan industry, these new commitments will come at no additional cost to
taxpayers. It's time that taxpayer dollars go towards our student's
future--and the future of our competitiveness as a nation.
I urge my colleagues to support this remarkable legislation.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues in
support of efforts to make college education more affordable for more
Americans. Indeed earlier this year I voted in support of H.R. 5, the
College Student Relief Act of 2007. I believed that bill took some
positive steps and was pleased to support it.
I am very disappointed that the bill before us, H.R. 2669, falls far
short of its goal. While those who drafted the bill assert that it is a
comprehensive solution to making college more affordable, H.R. 2669
fails to address the core problem of access to U.S. colleges and
universities: sky-rocketing rates of tuition and room and board. In
just the last 7 years, yearly inflation has increased on average 2.7
percent. However, higher education costs for students has increased an
average of 4.2 percent--a rate that is 55 percent higher than regular
inflation. This bill makes it easier for students to borrow more money
to face these costs, but it does nothing to fix the root problem. And,
the end result will be that under H.R. 2669, the average college
student graduating from college 4 years from now will still face a
higher college debt than those graduating this year--even with all of
the billions of dollars included in this bill. Why is that the case?
Because this bill does nothing to address the core problem facing
college students: uncontrolled growth in tuition, room and board.
Under H.R. 2669, those attending college in the future will be able
to borrow more money and perhaps pay a lower interest rate, but with
college expenses growing at a rate that far exceeds the annual
inflation rate, students will end college with a significantly larger
debt. By failing to address this fundamental problem, this bill avoids
the major issue facing families and college students. It is due to this
obvious omission that I could not vote for final passage of this bill.
[[Page H7545]]
H.R. 2669 will enable students to take on more debt which will
further burden them for many years past graduation. In 2006, the Higher
Education Price Index, HEPI, calculation showed that inflation for
colleges and universities jumped to 5 percent. This is 30 percent
higher than the regular inflation rate. When colleges and universities
know that students have access to more funds through financial aid,
loans, and grants they have simply seen this as an opportunity to raise
costs for students. This was the case in the past and it is likely to
happen again.
This bill does nothing to discourage colleges and universities from
further inflating their tuition rates. In fact, it will do the
opposite. If we truly want to help our students go into the world with
a good education and saddled with less debt, we should hold colleges
and universities who take government aid more accountable and not allow
them to continue their excessive increases in college costs. Our
students deserve better.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate on the bill has expired.
Amendment Offered by Mr. McKeon
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment made in order at the
desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Part B amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in House
Report 110-224 offered by Mr. McKeon:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Pell Grant Enhancement Act''
.
SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF LENDER INSURANCE PERCENTAGE.
(a) Amendment.--Subparagraph (G) of section 428(b)(1) of
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1078(b)(1)(G)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(G) insures 95 percent of the unpaid principal of loans
insured under the program, except that--
``(i) such program shall insure 100 percent of the unpaid
principal of loans made with funds advanced pursuant to
section 428(j) or 439(q); and
``(ii) notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this
subparagraph, such program shall insure 100 percent of the
unpaid principal amount of exempt claims as defined in
subsection (c)(1)(G);''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect with respect to loans made on or after
October 1, 2007.
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';
``(II) beginning October 1, 2007 and ending September 30,
2008, this subparagraph shall be applied by substituting `20
percent' for `24 percent';
``(III) beginning October 1, 2008 and ending September 30,
2010, this subparagraph shall be applied by substituting `18
percent' for `24 percent'; and
``(IV) beginning October 1, 2010, this subparagraph shall
be applied by substituting for `24 percent' a percentage
determined in accordance with the regulations of the
Secretary and equal to the average rate paid to collection
agencies that have contracts with the Secretary.''.
SEC. 4. ELIMINATION OF EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMER STATUS FOR
LENDERS.
(a) Elimination of Status.--Part B of title IV of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1071 et seq.) is
amended by striking section 428I (20 U.S.C. 1078-9).
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Part B of title IV of such Act
is further amended--
(1) in section 428(c)(1) (20 U.S.C. 1078(c)(1))--
(A) by striking subparagraph (D); and
(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) through (H) as
subparagraphs (D) through (G), respectively; and
(2) in section 438(b)(5) (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b)(5)), by
striking the matter following subparagraph (B).
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (a)
and (b) shall take effect on October 1, 2007.
SEC. 5. REDUCTION OF LENDER SPECIAL ALLOWANCE PAYMENTS.
Section 438(b)(2)(I) of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b)(2)(I)) is amended by adding at the end
the following new clauses:
``(vi) Reduction for loans disbursed on or after october 1,
2007.--With respect to a loan on which the applicable
interest rate is determined under section 427A(l) and for
which the first disbursement of principal is made on or after
October 1, 2007, the special allowance payment computed
pursuant to this subparagraph shall be computed--
``(I) by substituting `2.0 percent' for `2.34 percent' each
place it appears in this subparagraph;
``(II) by substituting `1.4 percent' for `1.74 percent' in
clause (ii); and
``(III) by substituting `2.0 percent' for `2.64 percent'
each place it appears in clauses (iii) and (iv).''.
SEC. 6. UNIT COST CALCULATION FOR GUARANTY AGENCY ACCOUNT
MAINTENANCE FEES.
Section 458(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1087h(b)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Account'' and inserting the following:
``(1) For fiscal years 2006 and 2007.--For each of the
fiscal years 2006 and 2007, account''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) For fiscal year 2008 and succeeding fiscal years.--
``(A) Unit cost basis.--For fiscal year 2008 and each
succeeding fiscal year, the Secretary shall calculate the
account maintenance fees payable to guaranty agencies under
subsection (a)(3), on a per-loan cost basis in accordance
with subparagraph (B).
``(B) Determinations.--To determine the amount that shall
be paid under subsection (a)(3) per outstanding loan
guaranteed by a guaranty agency for fiscal year 2008 and
succeeding fiscal years, the Secretary shall--
``(i) establish the per-loan cost basis amount by--
``(I) dividing the total amount of account maintenance fees
paid under subsection (a)(3) in fiscal year 2006, by
``(II) the number of loans under part B that were
outstanding in that fiscal year; and
``(ii) determine on October 1 of fiscal year 2008 and each
subsequent fiscal year, and pay to each guaranty agency, an
amount equal to the product of the number of loans under part
B that are outstanding on October 1 of that fiscal year and
insured by that guaranty agency multiplied by--
``(I) the amount determined under clause (i); increased by
``(II) a percentage equal to the percentage increase in the
Consumer Price Index for Wage Earners (as determined by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor)
between the calendar quarter ending on June 30, 2006, and the
calendar quarter ending on the June 30 preceding such October
1 of such fiscal year.''.
SEC. 7. TUITION SENSITIVITY.
(a) Elimination of Tuition Sensitivity.--Section 401(b) of
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a(b)) is
amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (3); and
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (9) as
paragraphs (3) through (8), respectively.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on July 1, 2008.
SEC. 8. MANDATORY PELL GRANT INCREASES.
(a) Extension of Authority.--Section 401(a) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(a)) is amended by striking ``fiscal year 2004'' and
inserting ``fiscal year 2017''.
(b) Funding for Increases.--Section 401(b) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(9) Additional funds.--
``(A) In general.--For an academic year, there are
authorized to be appropriated, and there are appropriated,
such sums as may be necessary to carry out subparagraph (B)
of this paragraph (in addition to any other amounts
appropriated to carry out this section and out of any money
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated) the following
amounts:
``(i) $1,454,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
``(ii) $1,915,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
``(iii) $2,380,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
``(iv) $2,845,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
``(v) $3,386,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
``(vi) $3,407,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
``(vii) $3,443,000,000 for fiscal year 2014;
``(viii) $3,474,000,000 for fiscal year 2015;
``(ix) $3,502,000,000 for fiscal year 2016; and
``(x) $3,526,000,000 for fiscal year 2017.
``(B) Increase in federal pell grants.--The amounts made
available pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph
shall be used to increase the amount of the maximum Pell
Grant for which a student shall be eligible during an award
year, as specified in the last enacted appropriation Act
applicable to that award year, by--
``(i) $350 for award year 2008-2009;
``(ii) $450 for award year 2009-2010;
``(iii) $550 for award year 2010-2011;
``(iv) $650 for award year 2011-2012; and
``(v) $750 for each of the award years 2012-2013 through
2017-2018.''.
(c) Authorized Maximums.--Section 401(b)(2)(A) (20 U.S.C.
1070a(b)(2)(A)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2)(A) The amount of the Federal Pell Grant for a student
eligible under this part shall be for each of the award years
2008-2009 through 2016-2017, the sum of--
``(i) the amount appropriated in the applicable
appropriation Act for the maximum Federal Pell Grant for that
award year; and
``(ii) the amount specified in subsection (a)(2)(B) for
that award year;
less an amount equal to the amount determined to be the
expected family contribution with respect to that student for
that year.''.
SEC. 9. PLUS LOAN INTEREST RATES.
Paragraph (2) of section 427A(l) of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1077a(l)(2)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(2) PLUS loans.--Notwithstanding subsection (h), with
respect to any loan under section 428B, the applicable rate
of interest--
``(A) shall be 8.5 percent on the unpaid principal balance
of any such loan for which
[[Page H7546]]
the first disbursement is made on or after July 1, 2006, and
before July 1, 2008; and
``(B) shall be 7.9 percent on the unpaid principal balance
of any such loan for which the first disbursement is made on
or after July 1, 2008.''.
SEC. 10. CONSUMER INFORMATION AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY IN
HIGHER EDUCATION.
Section 131 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1015) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 131. CONSUMER INFORMATION AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY IN
HIGHER EDUCATION.
``(a) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section to--
``(1) provide students and families with an easy-to-use,
comprehensive web-based tool for researching and comparing
institutions of higher education;
``(2) increase the transparency of college cost, price, and
financial aid; and
``(3) raise public awareness of information available about
postsecondary education, particularly among low-income
families, non-traditional student populations, and first-
generation college students.
``(b) College Opportunity On-Line (COOL) Website Re-Design
Process.--In carrying out this section, the Commissioner of
Education Statistics--
``(1) shall identify the data elements that are of greatest
importance to prospective students, enrolled students, and
their families, paying particular attention to low-income,
non-traditional student populations, and first-generation
college students;
``(2) shall convene a group of individuals with expertise
in the collection and reporting of data related to
institutions of higher education to--
``(A) determine the relevance of particular data elements
to prospective students, enrolled students, and families;
``(B) assess the cost-effectiveness of various ways in
which institutions of higher education might produce relevant
data;
``(C) determine the general comparability of the data
across institutions of higher education;
``(D) make recommendations regarding the inclusion of
specific data items and the most effective and least
burdensome methods of collecting and reporting useful data
from institutions of higher education; and
``(3) shall ensure that the redesigned COOL website--
``(A) uses, to the extent practicable, data elements
currently provided by institutions of higher education to the
Secretary;
``(B) includes clear and uniform information determined to
be relevant to prospective students, enrolled students, and
families;
``(C) provides comparable information, by ensuring that
data are based on accepted criteria and common definitions;
``(D) includes a sorting function that permits users to
customize their search for and comparison of institutions of
higher education based on the information identified through
the process as prescribed in paragraph (1) as being of
greatest relevance to choosing an institution of higher
education.
``(c) Data Collection.--
``(1) Data system.--The Commissioner of Education
Statistics shall continue to redesign the relevant parts of
the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System to include
additional data as required by this section and to continue
to improve the usefulness and timeliness of data collected by
such systems in order to inform consumers about institutions
of higher education.
``(2) College consumer profile.--The Secretary shall
continue to publish on the COOL website, for each academic
year and in accordance with standard definitions developed by
the Commissioner of Education Statistics (including
definitions developed under section 131(a)(3)(A) as in effect
on the day before the date of enactment of the College
Affordability and Transparency Act of 2007), from at least
all institutions of higher education participating in
programs under title IV the following information:
``(A) The tuition and fees charged for a first-time, full-
time, full-year undergraduate student.
``(B) The room and board charges for a first-time, full-
time, full-year undergraduate student.
``(C) The price of attendance for a first-time, full-time,
full-year undergraduate student, consistent with the
provisions of section 472.
``(D) The average amount of financial assistance received
by a first-year, full-time, full-year undergraduate student,
including--
``(i) each type of assistance or benefits described in
428(a)(2)(C)(ii);
``(ii) institutional and other assistance; and
``(iii) Federal loans under parts B, D, and E of title IV.
``(E) The number of first-time, full-time, full-year
undergraduate students receiving financial assistance
described in each clause of subparagraph (D).
``(F) The institutional instructional expenditure per full-
time equivalent student.
``(G) Student enrollment information, including information
on the number and percentage of full-time and part-time
students, the number and percentage of resident and non-
resident students.
``(H) Faculty-to-student ratios.
``(I) Faculty information, including the total number of
faculty and the percentage of faculty who are full-time
employees of the institution and the percentage who are part-
time.
``(J) Completion and graduation rates of undergraduate
students, identifying whether the completion or graduation
rates are from a 2-year or 4-year program of instruction and,
in the case of a 2-year program of instruction, the
percentage of students who transfer to 4-year institutions
prior or subsequent to completion or graduation.
``(K) A link to the institution of higher education with
information of interest to students including mission,
accreditation, student services (including services for
students with disabilities), transfer of credit policies and,
if appropriate, placement rates and other measures of success
in preparing students for entry into or advancement in the
workforce.
``(L) The college affordability information elements
specified in subsection (d).
``(M) Any additional information that the Secretary may
require.
``(d) College Affordability Information Elements.--The
college affordability information elements required by
subsection (c)(2)(L) shall include, for each institution
submitting data--
``(1) the sticker price of the institution for the 3 most
recent academic years;
``(2) the net tuition price of the institution for the 3
most recent academic years;
``(3) the percentage change in both the sticker price and
the net tuition price over the 3-year time period that is
being reported;
``(4) the percentage change in the CPI over the same time
period; and
``(5) whether the institution has been placed on
affordability alert status as required by subsection (e)(3).
``(e) Outcomes and Actions.--
``(1) Response from institution.--Effective on June 30,
2008, an institution that increases its sticker price at a
percentage rate for any 3-year interval ending on or after
that date that exceeds two times the rate of change in the
CPI over the same time period shall provide a report to the
Secretary, in such a form, at such time, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require. Such report shall
be published by the Secretary on the COOL website, and shall
include--
``(A) a description of the factors contributing to the
increase in the institution's costs and in the tuition and
fees charged to students; and
``(B) if determinations of tuition and fee increases are
not within the exclusive control of the institution, a
description of the agency or instrumentality of State
government or other entity that participates in such
determinations and the authority exercised by such agency,
instrumentality, or entity.
``(2) Quality-efficiency task forces.--
``(A) Required.--Each institution subject to paragraph (1)
that has a percentage change in its sticker price that is in
the highest 5 percent of all institutions subject to
paragraph (1) shall establish a quality-efficiency task force
to review the operations of such institution.
``(B) Membership.--Such task force shall include
administrators, business and civic leaders, and faculty, and
may include students, trustees, parents of students, and
alumni of such institution.
``(C) Functions.--Such task force shall analyze
institutional operating costs in comparison with such costs
at other institutions within the class of institutions. Such
analysis should identify areas where, in comparison with
other institutions in such class, the institution operates
more expensively to produce a similar result. Any identified
areas should then be targeted for in-depth analysis for cost
reduction opportunities.
``(D) Report.--The results of the analysis by a quality-
efficiency task force under this paragraph shall be made
available to the public on the COOL website.
``(3) Consequences for 2-year continuation of failure.--If
the Secretary determines that an institution that is subject
to paragraph (1)) has failed to reduce the subsequent
increase in sticker price below two times the rate of change
in the CPI for 2 consecutive academic years subsequent to the
3-year interval used under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall
place the institution on affordability alert status.
``(4) Exemptions.--Notwithstanding paragraph (3), an
institution shall not be placed on affordability alert status
if, for any 3-year interval for which sticker prices are
computed under paragraph (1)--
``(A) with respect the the class of institutions described
in paragraph (6) to which the institution belongs, the
sticker price of the institution is in the lowest quartile of
institutions within such class, as determined by the
Secretary, during the last year of such 3-year interval; or
``(B) the institution has a percentage change in its
sticker price computed under paragraph (1) that exceeds two
times the rate of change in the CPI over the same time
period, but the dollar amount of the sticker price increase
is less than $500.
``(5) Information to state agencies.--Any institution that
reports under paragraph (1)(B) that an agency or
instrumentality of State government or other entity
participates in the determinations of tuition and fee
increases shall, prior to submitting any information to the
Secretary under this subsection, submit such information to,
and request the comments and input of, such agency,
instrumentality, or entity. With respect to any such
institution, the Secretary shall provide a copy of any
communication by the
[[Page H7547]]
Secretary with that institution to such agency,
instrumentality, or entity.
``(6) Classes of institutions.--For purposes of this
subsection, the classes of institutions shall be those
sectors used by the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System, based on whether the institution is public, nonprofit
private, or for-profit private, and whether the institution
has a 4-year, 2-year, or less than 2-year program of
instruction.
``(7) Data rejection.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed as allowing the Secretary to reject the data
submitted by an individual institution of higher education.
``(f) Information to the Public.--The Secretary shall work
with public and private entities to promote broad public
awareness, particularly among middle and high school students
and their families, of the information made available under
this section, including by distribution to students who
participate in or receive benefits from means-tested
federally funded education programs and other Federal
programs determined by the Secretary.
``(g) Fines.--In addition to actions authorized in section
487(c), the Secretary may impose a fine in an amount not to
exceed $25,000 on an institution of higher education for
failing to provide the information required by this section
in a timely and accurate manner, or for failing to otherwise
cooperate with the National Center for Education Statistics
regarding efforts to obtain data under subsections (c) and
(j) and pursuant to the program participation agreement
entered into under section 487.
``(h) GAO Study and Report.--
``(1) GAO study.--The Comptroller General shall conduct a
study of the policies and procedures implemented by
institutions in increasing the affordability of postsecondary
education. Such study shall include information with respect
to--
``(A) a list of those institutions that--
``(i) have reduced their sticker prices; or
``(ii) are within the least costly quartile of institutions
within each class described in subsection (e)(6);
``(B) policies implemented to stem the increase in tuition
and fees and institutional costs;
``(C) the extent to which room and board costs and prices
changed;
``(D) the extent to which other services were altered to
affect tuition and fees;
``(E) the extent to which the institution's policies
affected student body demographics and time to completion;
``(F) what, if any, operational factors played a role in
reducing tuition and fees;
``(G) the extent to which academic quality was affected,
and how;
``(H) if the institution is a public institution, the
relationship between State and local appropriations and the
institution's tuition and fees;
``(I) the extent to which policies and practices reducing
costs and prices may be replicated from one institution to
another; and
``(J) other information as necessary to determine best
practices in increasing the affordability of postsecondary
education.
``(2) Interim and final reports.-- The Comptroller General
shall submit an interim and a final report regarding the
findings of the study required by paragraph (1) to the
appropriate authorizing committees of Congress. The interim
report shall be submitted not later than July 31, 2011, and
the final report shall be submitted not later than July 31,
2013.
``(i) Student Aid Recipient Survey.--
``(1) Survey required.--The Secretary shall conduct a
survey of student aid recipients under title IV on a regular
cycle and State-by-State basis, but not less than once every
4 years--
``(A) to identify the population of students receiving
Federal student aid;
``(B) to describe the income distribution and other
socioeconomic characteristics of federally aided students;
``(C) to describe the combinations of aid from State,
Federal, and private sources received by students from all
income groups;
``(D) to describe the debt burden of educational loan
recipients and their capacity to repay their education debts,
and the impact of such debt burden on career choices;
``(E) to describe the role played by the price of
postsecondary education in the determination by students of
what institution to attend; and
``(F) to describe how the increased costs of textbooks and
other instructional materials affects the costs of
postsecondary education to students.
``(2) Survey design.--The survey shall be representative of
full-time and part-time, undergraduate, graduate, and
professional and current and former students in all types of
institutions, and designed and administered in consultation
with the Congress and the postsecondary education community.
``(3) Dissemination.--The Commissioner of Education
Statistics shall disseminate the information resulting from
the survey in both printed and electronic form.
``(j) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to issue
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
``(k) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
``(1) Net tuition price.--The term `net tuition price'
means the average tuition and fees charged to a first-time,
full-time, full-year undergraduate student, minus the average
grants provided to such students, for any academic year.
``(2) Sticker price.--The term `sticker price' means the
average tuition and fees charged to a first-time, full-time,
full-year undergraduate student by an institution of higher
education for any academic year.
``(3) CPI.--The term `CPI' means the Consumer Price Index-
All Urban Consumers (Current Series).''.
SEC. 11. COLLEGE AFFORDABILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.
(a) .--Part G of title IV is amended by inserting after
section 486 (20 U.S.C. 1093) the following new section:
``SEC. 486A. COLLEGE AFFORDABILITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.
``(a) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section--
``(1) to provide, through a college affordability
demonstration project, for increased innovation in the
delivery of higher education and student financial aid in a
manner resulting in reduced costs for students as well as the
institution by employing one or more strategies including
accelerating degree or program completion, increasing
availability of, and access to, distance components of
education delivery, engaging in collaborative arrangements
with other institutions and organizations, and other
alternative methodologies; and
``(2) to help determine--
``(A) the most effective means of delivering student
financial aid as well as quality education;
``(B) the specific statutory and regulatory requirements
that should be altered to provide for more efficient and
effective delivery of student financial aid, as well as
access to high quality distance education programs, resulting
in a student more efficiently completing postsecondary
education; and
``(C) the most effective methods of obtaining and managing
institutional resources.
``(b) Demonstration Project Authorized.--
``(1) In general.--In accordance with the purposes
described in subsection (a) and the provisions of subsection
(d), the Secretary is authorized to select not more than 100
institutions of higher education, including those applying as
part of systems or consortia of such institutions, for
voluntary participation in the College Affordability
Demonstration Project in order to enable participating
institutions to carry out such purposes by providing programs
of postsecondary education, and making available student
financial assistance under this title to students enrolled in
those programs, in a manner that would not otherwise meet the
requirements of this title.
``(2) Waivers.--The Secretary is authorized to waive for
any institutions of higher education, or any system or
consortia of institutions of higher education, selected for
participation in the College Affordability Demonstration
Project, any requirements of this Act or the regulations
thereunder as deemed necessary by the Secretary to meet the
purpose described in subsection (a)(1), and shall make a
determination that the waiver can reasonably be expected to
result in reduced costs to students or institutions without
an increase in Federal program costs. The Secretary may not
waive under this paragraph the maximum award amounts for an
academic year or loan period.
``(3) Eligible applicants.--
``(A) Eligible institutions.--Except as provided in
subparagraph (B), only an institution of higher education
that is eligible to participate in programs under this title
shall be eligible to participate in the demonstration project
authorized under this section.
``(B) Prohibition.--An institution of higher education
described in section 102(a)(1)(C) shall not be eligible to
participate in the demonstration project authorized under
this section.
``(c) Application.--
``(1) In general.--Each institution or system of
institutions desiring to participate in the demonstration
project under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time and in such manner as the Secretary
may require.
``(2) Contents of applications.--Each application for the
college affordability demonstration project shall include at
least the following:
``(A) a description of the institution or system or
consortium of institutions and what quality assurance
mechanisms are in place to ensure the integrity of the
Federal financial aid programs;
``(B) a description of the innovation or innovations being
proposed and the affected programs and students, including--
``(i) a description of any collaborative arrangements with
other institutions or organizations to reduce costs;
``(ii) a description of any expected economic impact of
participation in the project within the community in which
the institution is located; and
``(iii) a description of any means the institution will
employ to reduce the costs of instructional materials, such
as textbooks;
``(C) a description of each regulatory or statutory
requirement for which waivers are sought, with a reason for
each waiver;
``(D) a description of the expected outcomes of the program
changes proposed, including the estimated reductions in costs
both for the institution and for students;
``(E) an assurance from each institution in a system or
consortium of a commitment to fulfill its role as described
in the application;
``(F) an assurance that the participating institution or
system of institutions will
[[Page H7548]]
offer full cooperation with the ongoing evaluations of the
demonstration project provided for in this section; and
``(G) any other information or assurances the Secretary may
require.
``(d) Selection.--In selecting institutions to participate
in the demonstration project under this section, the
Secretary shall take into account--
``(1) the number and quality of applications received,
determined on the basis of the contents required by
subsection (c)(2);
``(2) the Department's capacity to oversee and monitor each
institution's participation;
``(3) an institution's--
``(A) financial responsibility;
``(B) administrative capability;
``(C) program or programs being offered via distance
education, if applicable;
``(D) student completion rates; and
``(E) student loan default rates; and
``(4) the participation of a diverse group of institutions
with respect to size, mission, and geographic distribution.
``(e) Notification.--The Secretary shall make available to
the public and to the authorizing committees a list of
institutions selected to participate in the demonstration
project authorized by this section. Such notice shall include
a listing of the specific statutory and regulatory
requirements being waived for each institution and a
description of the innovations being demonstrated.
``(f) Evaluations and Reports.--
``(1) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall evaluate the
demonstration project authorized under this section on a
biennial basis. Such evaluations specifically shall review--
``(A) the extent to which expected outcomes, including the
estimated reductions in cost, were achieved;
``(B) the number and types of students participating in the
programs offered, including the progress of participating
students toward recognized certificates or degrees and the
extent to which participation in such programs increased;
``(C) issues related to student financial assistance
associated with the innovations undertaken;
``(D) effective technologies and alternative methodologies
for delivering student financial assistance;
``(E) the extent of the cost savings to the institution,
the student, and the Federal Government resulting from the
waivers provided, and an estimate as to future cost savings
for the duration of the demonstration project;
``(F) the extent to which students saved money by
completing their postsecondary education sooner;
``(G) the extent to which the institution reduced its
tuition and fees and its costs by participating in the
demonstration project
``(H) the extent to which any collaborative arrangements
with other institutions or organizations have reduced the
participating institution's costs; and
``(I) the extent to which statutory or regulatory
requirements not waived under the demonstration project
present difficulties for students or institutions.
``(2) Policy analysis.--The Secretary shall review current
policies and identify those policies that present impediments
to the implementation of innovations that result in cost
savings and in expanding access to education.
``(3) Reports.--The Secretary shall provide a report to the
authorizing committees on a biennial basis regarding--
``(A) the demonstration project authorized under this
section;
``(B) the results of the evaluations conducted under
paragraph (1);
``(C) the cost savings to the Federal Government by the
demonstration project authorized by this section; and
``(D) recommendations for changes to increase the
efficiency and effective delivery of financial aid.
``(g) Oversight.--In conducting the demonstration project
authorized under this section, the Secretary shall, on a
continuing basis--
``(1) ensure compliance of institutions or systems of
institutions with the requirements of this title (other than
the sections and regulations that are waived under subsection
(b)(2));
``(2) provide technical assistance to institutions in their
application to and participation in the demonstration
project;
``(3) monitor fluctuations in the student population
enrolled in the participating institutions or systems of
institutions;
``(4) monitor changes in financial assistance provided at
the institution; and
``(5) consult with appropriate accrediting agencies or
associations and appropriate State regulatory authorities.
``(h) Termination of Authority.--The authority of the
Secretary under this section shall cease to be effective on
October 1, 2012.''.
SEC. 12. MULTIPLE GRANTS.
(a) Amendment.--Paragraph (5) of section 401(b) (as
redesignated by section 7(a)(2) of this Act) is amended to
read as follows:
``(5) Year-round pell grants.--The Secretary is authorized,
for students enrolled in a baccalaureate degree, associate's
degree, or certificate program of study at an eligible
institution, to award such students not more than two Pell
grants during an award year to permit such students to
accelerate progress toward their degree or certificate
objectives by enrolling in courses for more than 2 semesters,
or 3 quarters, or the equivalent, in a given academic
year.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall be effective July 1, 2009.
SEC. 13. DEFERRAL OF LOAN REPAYMENT FOLLOWING ACTIVE DUTY.
Part G of title IV is amended by inserting after section
484B (20 U.S.C. 1091b) the following new section:
``SEC. 484C. DEFERRAL OF LOAN REPAYMENT FOLLOWING ACTIVE
DUTY.
``(a) Deferral of Loan Repayment Following Active Duty.--In
addition to any deferral of repayment of a loan made under
this title pursuant to section 428(b)(1)(M)(iii),
455(f)(2)(C), or 464(c)(2)(A)(ii), a borrower of a loan under
this title who is a member of the National Guard or other
reserve component of the Armed Forces of the United States,
or a member of such Armed Forces in a retired status, is
called or ordered to active duty, and is currently enrolled,
or was enrolled within six months prior to the activation, in
a program of instruction at an eligible institution, shall be
eligible for a deferment during the 13 months following the
conclusion of such service, except that a deferment under
this subsection shall expire upon the borrower's return to
enrolled student status.
``(b) Active Duty.--Notwithstanding section 481(d), in this
section, the term `active duty' has the meaning given such
term in section 101(d)(1) of title 10, United States Code,
except that such term--
``(1) does not include active duty for training or
attendance at a service school; but
``(2) includes, in the case of members of the National
Guard, active State duty.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 531, the
gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and a Member opposed each will
control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, if bridging the gap between low-income students and
their dream of a college education is a primary goal of this House,
then this substitute should be adapted with ease. That's because this
amendment nearly doubles the Pell Grant increase provided by the
underlying bill.
It makes Pell funding available year around for students seeking to
finish their degrees more quickly by taking summer courses, which also
makes a savings for them, and it eliminates a role that needlessly
punishes students attending low-cost schools by limiting the amount of
Pell Grant funds they can receive each year.
First some background. Less than a third of savings in the underlying
bill, roughly $6 billion, is directed to the most successful student
aid program on the books today, the Pell Grant program.
In fact, more funds under the base bill are directed toward those who
are, by definition, no longer even students. This is done by
temporarily phasing down interest rates on certain loans being repaid
by college graduates.
The remaining third of the bill triggers billions of dollars in new
entitlement spending, including nine new areas of entitlement spending
all together. In fact, some of this new spending is not even directed
towards students, but rather to institutions, like colleges,
universities, and philanthropic organizations.
This Pell Grant substitute will tip the balance back toward low-
income students struggling to pay for their college education by
increasing the maximum Pell Grant far more than the underlying bill.
Specifically, it would provide for $9 billion in additional funding for
Pell Grants over the next 5 years. Again, that's nearly double what the
underlying bill would do.
Here's how we do it. This Pell Grant proposal adopts the same cut to
lender insurance rates from 97 to 95 percent as the underlying bill,
while having the same goal of reducing administrative fees paid to
guaranteed agencies as well.
In addition, this substitute would save the Federal Government about
$11 billion through lower special allowance payments.
I believe this structural savings is far more responsible than the
underlying bill which, much like the President's fiscal year 2008
budget, fails to take into account the fact that Congress cut some $18
billion from the student loan programs just last year.
With these savings, more than $15 billion in total, this amendment
corrects current law to equalize the Pell and direct loan rates for
PLUS loans at 7.9 percent. It retains bipartisan language from the
underlying bill to permit members of the Armed Forces the ability to
defer their loans for up to 13 months upon returning from service.
[[Page H7549]]
Most importantly, it invests more than $9 billion in the Pell Grant
program. This investment would allow us to increase the maximum Pell
Grant by $350 in 2008, compared to the smaller increase in the
underlying bill, and by $100 for each year thereafter.
On top of that, this measure would pay down the deficit by $5.74
billion. That's more than three times what the underlying bill would
dedicate toward deficit reduction.
{time} 1400
Also included in this substitute are key college cost reforms,
including the College Affordability and Transparency Act legislation
that I introduced earlier this year to arm parents and students with
more information about college costs than ever before. The measure also
would take important steps to insist that colleges and universities be
held more accountable for their role in the college cost crisis.
Mr. Speaker, through my substitute amendment, we would increase Pell,
decrease the deficit, more directly address college costs and put in
place a handful of other student benefits without creating a single new
entitlement program. We would accomplish all of this without creating a
new maze of rules and regulations for students, parents and
institutions to navigate. And, we would accomplish all of this without
shortchanging the low-income students who need the most help to get on
the ladder to achieve the American dream. I urge my colleagues to join
me in supporting it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in
opposition to the amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 30 minutes.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to
the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu), a member of the committee.
Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me the time.
And with just a minute or two of time, one of the saddest moments,
one of the two saddest moments in my relatively brief career here in
the United States House was when this Chamber acted at the President's
request to cut $12 billion from college financial aid. That occurred
the day after a State of the Union Address where the President talked
about American competitiveness.
Today, we take a bold step in rectifying that error. And I just want
to refer a moment to the other saddest day of my thus far 8 years in
the House of Representatives, and that was the decision in this Chamber
to go to war in Iraq.
Those were the two saddest moments in my congressional career: Begin
a war in error, and now perpetuating a pride. But at least today, at
this moment, we are having an opportunity to rectify, in my view, the
other great error that we committed during my time in this Chamber, and
that is the $12 billion cut that the Education Committee passed, the
prior majority passed in this Chamber, and that went into effect
without a necessary 60-vote majority in the Senate.
Now, we can propose this greatest increase in college financial aid.
We may or may not have the votes for cloture in the other Chamber, but
this is the right thing to do. This is the right thing to do. It will
make America more competitive. It will help individuals, and it will
help our society, and we will rectify the errors we have made in the
past one by one.
I rise in support of the College Cost Reduction Act.
Affordable access to quality post-secondary education is the best
tool available to ensure success and the kind of career that can
support a family. It is also critical that American students have the
education that will help them remain competitive in an increasingly
global and knowledge-based economy.
The College Cost Reduction Act provides a major funding increase to
assist students and their families achieve the goal paying for college,
and much more--at no new expense to taxpayers. It provides tuition
assistance to undergraduates who commit to teaching in low-income
communities or high-need subject areas. It rewards those who serve
their communities--first responders and law enforcement officers, for
example, by providing loan forgiveness to those that serve others.
Perhaps most importantly, the bill provides a major help to students
in my home state of Oregon. The bill expands Pell Grant eligibility,
and the maximum Pell Grant scholarship is increased over $500. This
means nearly 70,000 Oregonians could benefit from the bill. This
translates into $194 million dollars in aid to Oregon students and
families over five years.
College costs have skyrocketed over the past decade.
The College Cost Reduction Act is instrumental in helping more
Americans achieve their dream of a college education. I strongly
support this bill, and urge my colleagues to do so as well.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I recognize the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop) for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the
amendment of the ranking member, and I urge its defeat, and I urge our
colleagues to vote in support of the underlying bill. I do so for
several reasons; but before I talk about that, I would like to talk
about some of the things that I have heard here today in the debate
that disturbed me greatly and I think require being addressed.
First is that I believe the ranking member, I am going to paraphrase
him, but I think correctly said that we just can't help ourselves; that
if you give us an opportunity to spend money, we are going to spend it.
And I would rephrase that, and I would say that, we just can't help
ourselves. If you give us an opportunity to solve a problem, we are
going to solve it, and we are going to do so in a fiscally responsible
way. And the problem that we are trying to solve with this underlying
bill is diminished access and affordability to higher education, a
problem which, if we leave unaddressed, is going to have a very serious
consequence in terms of our future and in terms of our security. And we
are addressing this problem, as I say, in a fiscally responsible way.
It will not cost the taxpayers one dime.
I have also heard a great deal of talk about how we are not
addressing the issue of entitlement spending and how we are creating
nine new entitlements. Our mandatory budget represents about 60 or 70
percent of the total expenditures of this Nation, and it includes a
number of so-called entitlement programs: Social Security, Medicare,
Medicaid, interest on the national debt. And I would point out that, of
all these programs, only one is truly mandatory, and that is interest
on the national debt. And that number has ballooned over the last 6
years under the watch of the then majority when they controlled every
lever of power in this town.
Fiscal year 2001, interest on the national debt was $200 billion a
year. Fiscal year 2007, interest on the national debt is $265 billion a
year. And the total debt has grown by $3 trillion.
So I would simply say that it rings hollow to hear a lecture on
fiscal responsibility and to be told that we are behaving in a way that
is injurious to the American taxpayer when in fact our behavior is the
antithesis of the behavior that has held sway this House for the last 6
years.
Now, with the amendment here is what we would not get if we were to
pass Mr. McKeon's amendment: We would get no reduction in interest
rates, a condition that would influence students' decisions to attend
colleges. There would be no increase in the Federal capital
contribution for the Perkins loan program. I will repeat; this is a
loan program that this administration is trying earnestly to kill in
what is a terribly ill-advised move.
There is this notion out there that the Federal capital contribution
for Perkins will increase availability of Perkins loans. And to correct
a common misperception, the Perkins loan program is not duplicative of
the FFEL program or of the Direct Lending program. In fact, a great
many students borrow from both programs. There would be no investment
in cooperative education, a program that exposes students to the world
of work and help enriches their college experience. There would be no
investment in placing a highly qualified teacher in every classroom,
something that we absolutely must do if we are going to make the
advances on the K-12 level that we simply must make, the advances that
were contemplated by the No Child Left Behind legislation, advances
that we now have the opportunity to put in place. And there would be
diminished opportunity for students who are needy to pursue careers in
public service and in
[[Page H7550]]
not-for-profit. We cannot have a condition in which students choose
their career based on their indebtedness, and this underlying
legislation will address that.
So I believe that the College Cost Reduction Act is, as I said
before, long overdue, much needed and will address some very serious
concerns that currently confront college students and their families,
and will do so in a fiscally responsible way. And I urge its passage,
and I urge defeat of the amendment by Mr. McKeon.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me say how relieved I am that the measure we are
considering today does not incorporate the highly controversial STAR
Act, which would turn over the entire Federal student loan program to
Washington bureaucrats. I appreciate the chairman for not including
that.
I continue to strongly support healthy competition between the
government-run Direct Loan program and the market-based Pell program,
and doing anything to upset that competition would be terrible for
students, parents and taxpayers alike. Nonetheless, I would be remiss
if I did not express some concerns about the extent of the Pell cuts in
H.R. 2669.
After cutting some $18 billion from our student loan program during a
budget reconciliation process in the last Congress, an additional cut
of more than $18.75 billion this year strikes me as overreaching.
Though this figure is close to the President's cut in his latest budget
proposal, I believe the administration itself went too far and gave
very little consideration to the impact of the cuts we made in the last
Congress.
I also believe supporters of H.R. 2669 did not take into account the
impact the bill's cuts may have on student loan default rates. When I
became chairman, 12 years ago, of this subcommittee over higher
education, the default rates were running about 25 percent. And through
competition and the things that we have worked on during that time, we
have cut that rate to where now the default rate is running at about 5
percent. If it gets back up to those higher ranges again, that is going
to cost the American taxpayer another $11 billion a year.
House Republicans are already on record as having supported savings
from some of the lender subsidies, and there may well be room to go
even further. Later today, in my substitute, I offer cutting $15
billion, which is a little less than the underlying bill but may still
be too high. Only time will tell. But we must be cautious to not
overreach.
The majority often takes aim at student lenders and seeks continual
and excessive cuts as a way to punish them for daring to make a profit.
You know, businesses have to make a profit or they don't remain in
business. And if they don't remain in business and making loans to
students, running about $70 billion a year now, if they don't continue
to make those loans, some would say, well, then the direct lending
program can take it over, which means the Department of Education,
which there have been some criticisms of, would become the largest bank
in the world, doing all of the student loan system. Early in my tenure
here, they had to shut down their program because they couldn't keep
up, and it was a much smaller program at the time. I have very great
concerns of turning the whole student loan program over to the
Department of Education.
The real victims in all of this debate are the smaller lenders. The
large lenders, which is kind of a paradox because they are the ones
that we seem to be going after, they will survive, and they will even
get better. The small lenders that help those that need the small
loans, it takes about $7,000 for a lender to make a profit on these
loans. In my community, kids going to the community colleges need a
much smaller loan. The tuition, the fees and everything run less than
$1,000 a year. And if they take out a loan to cover that, the lenders
that are making that loan really aren't making any money; they are
doing it as a service. They are not going to do that for long. When
they keep getting hit with these kind of cuts, they will just get out
of the program, and then, eventually, it will be turned over to the
government-run program.
Let me just give a couple of examples here of the things I am
concerned about. The Navy Federal Credit Union right here in Virginia
that holds $280 million in Federal loans; or San Miguel Federal Credit
Union that holds $140 million; or Simmons First National Bank in Pine
Bluff, Arkansas, that holds $86 billion; or Sovereign Bank in Reading,
Pennsylvania, that holds $79 million; Commerce Bank and Trust in
Topeka, Kansas, that holds $60 million; or Zion's First National Bank
in Salt Lake with $67 million; will these lenders still be in a program
offering loans to their local citizens, or will they be driven out of
the program by large lenders such as Sallie Mae? That is something that
time will tell as we keep cutting the subsidy that the Federal
Government gives now to help these small businesses remain to give the
help to those students that need the loans the very most.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to
the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Yarmuth).
Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, in this great land of opportunity, wealth
should not be a prerequisite for education, and it should not be a
prerequisite for future success. For too many hardworking and qualified
Americans, a college degree is the key to a successful career.
{time} 1415
And for millions more, that education sends them so deep into debt
that raising a family is impossible. The College Cost Reduction Act
will respond to this injustice with an unparalleled commitment in
higher education. 140,000 students and families will save more than
$200 million on tuition costs in my home State of Kentucky alone.
We've heard a lot during this debate from our colleagues on the other
side throwing the word around of ``entitlement'' as if ``entitlement''
is a dirty word. And I will grant that over the years, some
entitlements have not been particularly productive, but entitlements
can also be significant investments in not only human capital but in
the future of this country.
And in this particular instance, what we are saying is we are going
to make a dramatic step not just to improve the lives of millions of
young Americans, but also to make an investment in their futures and
the future of this economy. And if we don't do it, the great disparity
in wealth between the most wealthy people in this country and everyone
else will continue to grow, and we will face an economy in which we are
not developing the type of talent that will keep this country at the
stature that it has always maintained.
So I am firmly against and urge my colleagues to vote against the
amendment. I strongly support the College Cost Reduction Act because
this is ultimately an investment in our future as a country, as a great
nation, and the future of many Americans who without this help will be
destined to a mundane future, which will mean that our country will
result in the same state.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield at this time to the
gentlelady from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) such time as she may
consume.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from
California for the work that he has done on this. I also want to
commend him for his appreciation for how we approach education and how
we approach access to education in this country. His work in the
committee has not gone unnoticed, and we do appreciate that commitment.
I do rise today to support the McKeon substitute that we have before
us, and I think that it addresses some of the problems that so many
Members on both sides of the aisle have problems with in the underlying
legislation. You cannot deny that there are nine new entitlement
programs that are contained in the underlying legislation, and quite
frankly, we have heard from so many people who have expressed concern
over this.
As we are at a time when people talk about the need to reduce the
size of the Federal Government, to reduce the bureaucracy, to reduce
the number of programs, here comes a piece of legislation, and lo and
behold, you're going to have nine new programs.
[[Page H7551]]
Now, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, there are so many that say, why
would you do this? Why would you not do an assessment of the needs and
then put the money where the needs are?
And Mr. McKeon has done that, as he has addressed the Pell Grants and
spending the funding, increasing the Pell Grants, which address the
access component that is so important to our students.
Another component that is in there that I think many of the Members
would be interested in is the changes that it makes in providing funds
for year-round Pell Grants, there again answering a question and
solving a problem that we hear from our constituents and the type Pell
Grant program that they want, the access that they want, being certain
that we're going to help those students who wish to pursue their
education not only in the fall, not only in the spring, but the summer
as well. We know that this is very important as people look at new type
schedules, as they look at moving on through the educational process
and getting into the workforce.
We know that we have different areas where we need employment and
being able to finish a little bit earlier. Not everybody wants to go on
a 4- or 5-year program. There are some people that want to go through
in a 3-year program, 3\1/2\-year program, and so this addresses a
societal change and a need that is there that allows that flexibility
that students want. And that is where we need to place the emphasis,
allowing people to take control, individuals to take control and make
decisions that are going to suit them and not having the bureaucracy
make those for them, which all too often, when we create nine new
entitlement programs, with nine new bureaucracies, we don't see fast
decision-making on something. We see this go into that black hole or
the terminal put on hold that so many of our constituents continue to
complain about every day.
I would also like to commend to this body and thank Mr. McKeon for
the work that puts the emphasis on our military by providing for them
extended deferment options for our returning soldiers who may need
extra time to get settled and to return to careers and be able to begin
repaying any outstanding student loans. Certainly in my district, the
Seventh District of Tennessee, this is something that has been
recognized as a need. We have so many that have served so honorably
with the 101st Airborne at Fort Campbell, and this is a provision that
is important. It is one that is recognized by us, by the minority, by
those of us on this side of the aisle, and it's one that we do express
our thanks for being included.
The McKeon amendment, the substitute is the right move. It is the
right balance. It puts the funding where it is needed by increasing
those Pell Grants, and I do rise in support of it, and I thank the
gentleman for his work.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to
the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Miller for his
recognition.
I rise in support of the College Cost Reduction Act and want to thank
my good friend, the chairman, for his leadership and the members of the
committee for their exceptional work.
While I am very supportive of the bill's overall goal, I have a
concern that the bill incorporates the Bush administration's proposal
to significantly cut the yield on all lenders across the board.
Students and parents have saved millions of dollars due to smaller
competitive lenders offering consolidation loans at lower interest
rates. Greater competition leads to lower prices and more choices for
the consumer.
I do want to thank the chairman for his recognition of small lenders.
And quite honestly, he's worked very, very hard to get the legislation
to this point, and I know he continues to try to do that.
I want to thank the chairman for eliminating the origination fee for
small lenders because that's an important part of this bill as well. It
will lower interest rates for students in the future. But we must
ensure that individuals currently enrolled do not pay more when they're
starting to repay their loans.
I look forward to working with Chairman Miller and the ranking member
and hope that this matter will be addressed in conference, and I know
the chairman has committed to continue to try to do that. We must
ensure that we help all students, parents and lenders equally and
fairly.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany), a member of the committee.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I thank our ranking member for giving me
time to speak on this.
I rise in support of the McKeon substitute amendment, and I'm opposed
to the underlying bill as it's written. Historically, our Federal
Government has limited entitlement spending to programs like Medicare
and Social Security, and we're still trying to work out or trying to
figure out how to make those programs solvent and sustainable.
The underlying bill creates nine new entitlement programs. And
knowing that entitlement programs never die, we need to admit to the
taxpayers that if this passes they will be expected to kick in another
15 to $30 billion to cover the cost of these new entitlement programs
starting in 2013.
It also starts the precedent of creating entitlement programs for
institutions and organizations. This act does little to reduce college
costs and shortchanges those students who need help the most to pay for
college. The bill spends less than one-third of the total savings on
investing in low income students struggling to achieve their dreams of
a college education.
Rather than addressing the needs of our Nation's low income students,
this bill spends billions of dollars on providing additional subsidies
to institutions of higher education.
I urge my colleagues to instead support the McKeon amendment, which
would increase Pell Grants for our neediest students.
The amendment, in addition, makes two significant improvements to the
Pell Grant program. It provides funds for year-round Pell Grants to
help those students who wish to pursue their education, not only in the
fall and spring, but in summer as well.
For too long, the student aid programs have only addressed the needs
of traditional dependent students who attend fall and spring semester
and then go home for summer. It's time that we do more to meet the
needs of working adults and nontraditional students who need greater
flexibility in pursuing their educational goals.
The amendment reduces interest rates for parents and graduate
students in the Pell program who now pay 8.5 percent instead of 7.9
percent, which is paid by their peers in the direct loan program.
There's simply no reason at all to charge parents and students
different interest rates, and this problem needs to be addressed as
soon as possible. I'm disappointed that my colleagues on the other side
of the aisle did not see the need to help these parents and students
who are being unfairly penalized under current law.
Furthermore, this amendment also helps our military, as was mentioned
earlier, by providing extended deferment options for our returning
soldiers who may need extra time to get settled before repaying any
outstanding student loans. This provision was included in the committee
mark, and for that I'm grateful, and I think it's certainly a provision
I support.
And finally, the McKeon amendment addresses a concern that Mr. McKeon
has been voicing for the last three or four years, and that concern has
to do with rising costs of college. I'm happy to see that this
amendment includes the text of Mr. McKeon's bill, H.R. 472, which
brings much needed transparency to the college cost issue.
As we all know, rising college costs are a major concern of parents
across the country who find it more and more difficult to pay their
tuition bills; yet no one can or will explain why costs continue to
increase at rates far exceeding the rate of inflation. It's time to arm
parents and students with information that can be used to make these
wise choices in selecting an institution of higher learning.
And for these reasons, I wholeheartedly support the McKeon amendment
as a substitute to this bill, and urge passage of this very important
amendment.
[[Page H7552]]
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes
to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the
amendment in the nature of a substitute for it undermines and it
strikes all of the important initiatives that cause this legislation to
be one of the imperative legislative initiatives of this Congress.
It impacts negatively the middle class. It undermines the qualified
teacher provision. It takes away the reward for public service and, of
course, it does not deal with the issue of philanthropic participation
in college retention and financing.
But let me tell you what I am supporting. I am supporting the single
largest increase in college funding, college aid since the GI Bill. I
am supporting the mother who spoke to me on the way up to Washington
saying, ``I'm a middle class, single parent, working to send my
daughter to college, and I just can't do it. Does anybody understand
that plea? I just can't do it.'' This helps this mother send her
daughter to college!
And what does this aid package do? This incentive package reinvests
in America's young people! It reinvests by strengthening the middle
class, by making college more affordable. It increases the power of the
Pell Grant through scholarship. It insures that we have qualified
teachers in every classroom. It is an equal opportunity promoter of
education for Americans.
And then it does something unique. It does something that is not
discriminatory. It reflects on the value of historically black
colleges, Hispanic-serving colleges and other colleges that serve
underserved populations.
I know the real truth of that, representing Texas Southern University
when our Governor could find no other way to solve the problem of that
college other than to put it into a conservatorship. Isn't it
interesting, Mr. Speaker, that if they had put it into a
conservatorship, they would have lost all of their accreditation.
This bill invests in helping to retain students. It gives them
scholarships. It promotes the colleges.
I don't know if this can be seen, but it is clear when we show this
example of what Republicans have done in investing in our college
education and what Democrats have done.
{time} 1430
I know that my good friend on the other side of the aisle agrees with
me that the education of our children is not a partisan issue. So I
would encourage him to, if you will, ignore his motion for a substitute
and support the underlying bill because colleges like Texas Southern
University, Prairie View A&M and Morgan State and Florida A&M are
grateful.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2669, the Education and
Labor College Cost Reduction Act of 2007. This bill does much more than
ease the burden of student loans for college graduates--it will make
the American dream possible for low- and middle-income students and
families who pay for college. Mr. Speaker, in 21st-century America, a
college education is critical for individual success and the strength
of our Nation. Higher education is associated with better health,
greater wealth, and more vibrant civic participation, as well national
economic competitiveness in today's global environment. As the need for
a college degree has grown, however, so has the cost of obtaining that
education. The result is rising student debt.
H.R. 2669 would provide about $18 billion in college financial aid at
no new cost to taxpayers. This new investment is critical for African-
American students and their families, especially given that African-
American students comprise about 12 percent of all undergraduate
students. Many institutions have helped black students bridge ethnic-
related economic barriers, making a college education possible for
underprivileged minorities. Among historically black colleges and
universities (HBCUs), which give African American students an
opportunity to have an educational experience in a community in which
they are a part of the majority, costs are also rising. This resolution
would support many of these honorable institutions in their righteous
deeds in educating our underprivileged students of color.
Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 2669 because it will increase the maximum
Pell Grant award by $500 and increase eligibility to serve more
students in the program. The Federal Pell Grant Program prides itself
on providing need-based grants to low-income undergraduate and certain
postbaccalaureate students to promote access to postsecondary
education. Forty-five percent of African American and Hispanic students
at 4-year colleges depend on Pell Grants, compared to 23 percent of all
students. Approximately 4.5 million students currently depend on Pell
Grants and ``over 70 percent of Pell Grant funds go to students from
families with incomes of $20,000 a year or less''. Increasing the
maximum Pell Grant Award will expand racial and ethnic diversity in
higher education institutions, benefiting not only the institutions
cultural background but it will also be a great learning experience for
students to learn diverse cultural background different from their own.
H.R. 2669 would cut the interest rates on need-based Federal student
loans in half from 6.8 percent to 3-4 percent over 5 years. Once fully
implemented, this cut would save the typical borrower--with about
$13,800 in need-based loan debt--$4,400 over the life of the loan.
About 38 percent of African-American students take out need-based
student loans each year. By cutting interest rates on Federal loans,
Congress can save college graduates thousands of dollars over the life
of their loans. Mr. Speaker, recent graduates, especially those of
minority status with low to moderate incomes, must spend the vast
majority of their salaries on necessities such as rent, health care,
and food. For borrowers struggling to cover basic costs, student loan
repayment can create a significant and measurable impact on their
lives.
Crushing student debt also has societal consequences, according to a
report by two highly respected economists, Drs. Saul Schwarz and Sandy
Baum, the prospect of burdensome debt likely deters skilled and
dedicated college graduates from entering and staying in important
careers educating our Nation's children and helping the country's most
vulnerable populations.
To solve this problem and ensure that higher education remains within
reach for all Americans, we need to increase need-based grant aid; make
loan repayment fair and affordable; protect borrowers from usurious
lending practices; and provide incentives for State governments and
colleges to control tuition costs. H.R. 2669 is an important step in a
new and right direction for America.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 2669, the Education and
Labor College Cost Reduction Act of 2007.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Washington, our newest mother in the House of Representatives, Cathy
McMorris Rodgers.
Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I rise in
opposition to this bill.
In my opinion, it continues some broken promises to us by the
majority party. This bill is not fiscally responsible, and it is not
going to increase access to college education in this country. Yes, it
proposes to spend more money, nine new entitlement programs, that means
nine new categories for mandatory spending, but not in ways that will
increase access.
I worked my way through college. I was the first in my family to
graduate from college, and I am actually still paying some of those
student loans from going back to school recently. And I am grateful for
the opportunities I have had to go to college and am committed to
ensuring that every student in America has access to higher education.
It is really part of the American Dream. Unfortunately, this college
relief bill does little to actually increase access.
The Republican alternative would have roughly doubled the Pell Grant
aid proposed in this bill. That is direct help to students when they
need it, when they have to pay for tuition at the beginning of each
quarter. Reducing interest rates will help graduates with debt relief,
but it will not help students that are currently struggling to make
tuition. The vast majority of spending in this bill provides token
interest rate cuts for college graduates. Only one-third of the new
spending goes towards Pell Grants.
We must do more to fund new programs like Pell Grants, which actually
do increase access and opportunities, and the McKeon substitute would
do just that. We also must do more to address rising tuition costs and
the impact that is having on students' ability to afford college.
Tuition rates have risen above costs of inflation. Here is an example
from my own State, Washington State: Over the past 10 years, Washington
State
[[Page H7553]]
University and the University of Washington have both increased tuition
and fees by over 80 percent. At the same time, Washington's per capita
of personal income has increased at only about 40 percent, and
inflation is a little over 20 percent. We must address the root cause
of this problem, what is really driving tuition costs. This bill does
nothing to address the skyrocketing cost of tuition, which is
disastrous for students and parents.
The Democrats have talked a lot about providing college relief for
students; yet, once again, this bill does more to help graduates and
institutions rather than helping our current or future college
students. Our focus must be on remaining sure that every person who
wants to go to college has that opportunity to do so.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I am the only remaining
speaker.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire what our time remaining is.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California on the
Republican side has 8\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from
California on the Democratic side has 18 minutes remaining.
Mr. McKEON. I am happy to yield such time as he may consume to the
ranking member of the Higher Education Subcommittee, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Keller).
Mr. KELLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
I want to begin by thanking the chairman and also the ranking member
for their hard work on this bill. Chairman Miller has accommodated us
when he can and opposed us when he must, and I know we have worked
together as much as possible.
I think we owe the public an explanation, before we talk about our
differences, of what we have in common. So let me begin with what both
sides throughout this debate have in common, essentially three things.
First, we believe that all children, rich or poor, should have the
opportunity to go to college. Second, we believe that there should be
consequences and sunlight on those colleges who excessively increase
tuition. And, third, we believe that Pell Grants are the passport out
of poverty for so many worthy young children from low- and moderate-
income families, and they deserve to be increased.
Now, there are four major differences in this bill, and these
differences result in many of us Republicans not being able,
regrettably, to vote for this bill. The first difference is on
entitlements. How do you feel about new mandatory entitlements? The
Democratic bill has nine new entitlement programs with mandatory
spending. The Republican substitute has zero new entitlement programs.
How do you feel about Pell Grants, which is money we give to low- and
moderate-income families to help their kids go to college? Today the
Appropriations Committee is going to be increasing Pell Grants to
$4,700. Under the Democrat bill, next year, they will have an
additional $100, for a total of $4,800. Under the Republican
substitute, students would have an additional $350 for a total of
$5,050. So if you care about Pell Grants, you would do substantially
better under the Republican bill if you were a student than you would
under the Democrat bill.
How do you feel about paying down the deficit? The Democrats use only
$1.5 billion to pay down the deficit. We more than triple that in the
Republican bill.
How do you feel about private sector versus government-run programs?
We have a basic, honest philosophical difference in this belief.
Republicans believe that competition among the private sector is good
for lower prices and lower taxes. Democrats believe, at least some do,
that big government-run programs are better, and if that means
eventually raising taxes, especially on the wealthy, then so be it. And
we see that in the context of the student loan debate here. Republicans
aren't afraid to take money out of the private student lenders. We did
so as part of the Deficit Reduction Act. We took $16 billion away from
their subsidies. But the Democrat bill, on top of the $16 billion,
takes an additional $18.5 billion. It cuts the lender subsidies down to
the bone to the point that the private student loan providers really
won't be able to make a living if they are the small folks, and it will
run many of them out of business. The big folks will stay in business.
And that is okay to some on the other side. They prefer the direct
student lending program. Under our system, 80 percent of the loans on
the Federal level are provided with private sector money, called the
FFEL program; 20 percent are the direct student loans. And this bill
stacks it heavily in favor of the direct loan program. For example, if
you are a low-income public sector employee, such as a police officer
or social worker or a firefighter, and you have worked for at least 10
years, you get absolute forgiveness of your loan only in the direct
program. They don't forgive it in the private FFEL program. They want
to encourage people in the direct program.
If you are a parent and you want to take out a loan for your child to
go to college, under the FFEL program, which is the private program,
you have to pay 8.5 percent; under the direct lending program from the
government, only 7.9 percent. Again, trying to encourage people to go
with the big government program. And that was a drafting error that the
Republican Congress made when we were passing the Deficit Reduction
Act. And we tried to correct it in this bill. The Democrats knew about
it, and they didn't let us correct it. And I suspect, and this is my
feeling, it is because they expressly favor the direct loan program.
So we have a philosophical difference. I think the motives on both
sides are pure. We have an honest difference of opinion with regard to
entitlements, Pell grant funding, paying down the debt and private
sector involvement.
And for these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I will urge my colleagues to vote
``yes'' in favor of the McKeon substitute and ``no'' on the underlying
bill.
Mr. McKEON. How much time do I have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 4 minutes
remaining.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I again think that this has been an
interesting debate today. I thank the chairman for giving us the
opportunity to offer our substitute. I know he didn't have to do that,
and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss some of the differences and
to present an alternative.
For years I served as subcommittee chairman on the Higher Education
Subcommittee. And during that time, I talked about accessibility,
accountability and affordability for higher education. The only
opportunity that people have to better their lot in life here in this
country is through education. And I have seen studies that show that 40
percent of our young people from lower-income families are not able to
go to college. And that is just not acceptable. And I think that with
our substitute, where we put an additional almost $10 billion into Pell
Grants, I think that is a tremendous opportunity to help the
affordability aspect of college.
Again, through this bill, there is nothing done to lower the cost of
tuition, to make the higher education experience more affordable. As I
said, the cost of a higher education during the last 20 years has gone
up four times faster than the rate of inflation. Mrs. McMorris Rogers
mentioned earlier, in her State, the cost of tuition has gone up in the
last few years 80 percent while the cost of inflation has gone up 20
percent. Again, that is still four times faster. It has gone up faster
than the cost of health care. And I think that that is a crisis that in
some way we need to come together on. State governments, the Federal
Government, students, parents, we all need to come together, come to
grips with this issue because to prepare a workforce that is going to
carry us through this 21st Century and be competitive throughout the
world, we are going to have to do something to make it possible for our
young people to get a higher education.
I don't think adding new entitlements is the way to do it. I think
increasing Pell Grants is very important. And for that reason, I
encourage our colleagues to support the amendment, the substitute
amendment. If that passes, then support the bill. If it doesn't pass, I
encourage them to vote against the underlying bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, if I can inquire how
much time I have.
[[Page H7554]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 18 minutes
remaining.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized
for up to 18 minutes.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker and members of the
committee, I think this has been a very good debate because this has
been a debate about which direction this country should go in and I
believe will go in and the direction that the American people want this
country to go in.
Parents all over this Nation hear every day from business leaders,
from educational leaders, from the media, they hear that for America to
be competitive, we have got to have a smarter workforce, a better
skilled workforce, a better equipped workforce so that we can continue
America's leadership in the world in the economics of the world and in
the national security of this country. The key to that workforce, the
key to that competitiveness, again, the very people who are hiring
those individuals say that you must have a college education. What used
to be good enough, which was graduation from high school, is no longer
good enough today. You have to have advanced learning. It may be in a
professional school. It may be in a trade school. It may be in a
community college. It may be in a 4-year college. You may get some of
it now and some of it later. But the fact of the matter is, you need
those skills.
But what has happened over this time is that college education has
increased as rapidly as anything else in society, in fact, more rapidly
than many other indicators in our economy, over 35 to 40 percent over
the last 5 years above inflation. What has that meant? That meant that
families who thought they could afford that education now find that
they have to squeeze harder. That meant that people who thought they
weren't going to have to borrow money are now going to have to borrow
money. That meant that people who thought they were going to be able to
go to college are now deciding that they can no longer go to college.
They are going to postpone it or maybe not go at all.
{time} 1445
That's not good for America. That's not good for America's economy.
That's not good for America's democratic institutions. And it's not
good for our society. We need those young people to go to college.
What this legislation does today is it says to those individuals who
are fully qualified to go to college, we will not deny you access to
the college of your choice, to the education of your choice, to the
career of your choice, and to the curriculum of your choice because you
can't afford to pay for it. We're going to help you. We're not going to
give you everything you need. Your family is still going to have to
sacrifice, you're still going to have to pay back loans, but we're
going to give you greater access to the ability to do that.
We're going to take this country in a new direction. We're going to
take this country in a direction where we place a priority, a focus and
a vision for education in America today because we know we must.
We're told again by the leaders of all of the new technologies, the
new companies, the people who are investing in the future that we were
the beneficiaries of when John Kennedy said that he wanted to send a
person to the Moon and bring them back safely. It was more than a Moon
shot. John Kennedy captured our imagination; he captured world
leadership with that decision. And over the next decade, we did exactly
as he directed.
But you know what else they did? They give 28,000 high-performing
college students a grant to go to graduate school so they didn't have
to borrow money, they didn't have to walk around with a tin cup, they
didn't have to put themselves into debt, so they could use their best
skills and talents to create the space program. You know what they
created after they created the space program? They created Intel, they
created Microsoft, they created Hewlett Packard. They created the
infrastructure of this Nation. Now, did we whine and moan because they
got a grant and the taxpayers used their money? They created millions
of jobs in this country over the next four decades. That's what this is
about.
Those are the investments that my grandparents made in my education
before they ever met me. Those are the investments that my parents made
in my education after they met me. They still thought it was worth
something. And those are the investments that have made this country
the greatest and strongest Nation in the world, have made us an
economic leader, and have given us the ability to lead the world. Do we
want to turn our back on it now? If you accept this substitute, you're
turning our back on that idea.
The Republicans say, well, we're just going to take a little less
money, but we're going to put it all in the Pell Grant. The
Republicans, after flatlining Pell Grant all of these years when they
had the opportunity to do something, did nothing. Now they want to love
this bill to death by putting all the money in the Pell Grant.
This is what this legislation will do for Pell recipients; it will
take them up to $5,200 in a Pell Grant. That may or may not pay for
their education for that year, but it's a big leap forward.
But we also recognize something else, that this isn't the only
constituency struggling to pay for education in this country. No, there
are millions of students who will take out a subsidized student loan.
And for those students, and their parents who will help them pay it
back if they're that fortunate, for those students they will be paying
for it by themselves, we're saying we will cut the interest rate in
half when you graduate and you start to repay your loan. You borrow the
money today, you pay your tuition, and when it comes time to pay your
loan, your interest rate is half of what it is today.
Because we know that those middle-income families in this country are
struggling as hard as anybody. They have the same vision, the same hope
and the same aspiration for their children. So that's why we're doing
this, because it's the best investment we can make in this country in
that talent of our children, in the brilliance and the excitement and
the vision of those children. That's what this legislation is about.
But that's not what this substitute legislation is about. You cannot
walk away from them.
I find it interesting that just 4 months ago, 5 months ago, 124
Republicans voted to cut those interest rates for middle-income
families and their children, and now they're going to vote against it
today. So they voted for it then, and now they're going to vote against
it today. What was going on? Did they believe it then, or they don't
believe it now? Which is it? But the fact of the matter is, this is
about whether or not those families that struggle, they may be single
parents, they may be two in their family, they may be families that
find themselves with one, two or three kids in college at the same
time. This government should help them because those children will
return that gift of this Nation back to this Nation time and time again
over the life of their earnings, over their careers. They will give
back to this Nation because we made that investment as my parents and
grandparents made in us.
If you vote for this substitute, you get rid of the interest rate
cuts for those middle-income families. And also, for these very same
Pell recipients, over half of these students will have to borrow money
because a Pell Grant isn't enough. So they participate also in that
interest rate cut.
You fail to participate in the loan forgiveness for the teacher, for
the firefighter, for the policeman, for the special education teacher,
for first responders. For those people in critical occupations that
give so much to this society, but they're not the highest paying jobs,
we're telling them if you stay on the job 5 years, we will give you
$5,000 in loan forgiveness. For a student that graduates with an
average debt of around $13,000, $14,000, that's a significant amount of
loan forgiveness. What do we get? We get an educated firefighter, an
educated policeman, a school teacher. We get these people.
For high-performing college students who are willing to go into
teaching and go into math, science and engineering, and then go to the
most difficult schools to teach, we're saying we will give you $4,000 a
year in tuition assistance while you're in school, not later,
[[Page H7555]]
up to $16,000; again, an investment, because we now know that a highly
qualified teacher can dramatically change the educational outcomes and
the future for the children in ways that we can only dream about.
That's an important investment, because that investment in that teacher
will be invested in all of those students that come across his or her
line of vision in those classes.
That's why this legislation is about a vision for America. That's why
this legislation goes in a different direction. We stop today when we
flatline aid to education in this country. We want to invest in young
people. We want their families to be able to invest with us. And that's
the importance of this legislation.
And, clearly, the commitment that we make to minority-serving
institutions so that those students who are fully qualified to go to
school go to school, receive the kind of help to keep them in school so
they don't end up dropping out with a debt on the loans that they took.
We want that success. It's a problem that's recognized across the
country; we address it.
We raise the cap on the amount of money that families can borrow.
It's not great news to hear we let you borrow more, but it's a lot
cheaper than if you have to borrow it in the private loan market. It's
3.8 percent here, and it's 10, 12, 13, 14, 15 percent in the private
market. That means a lot to families. That means a lot to students.
That's what this legislation is about.
I would ask all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject
this substitute, to vote for the passage of the final bill. Let's take
America to a new future. Let's take America to new heights. Let's take
America to new greatness on the next generation of discoverers, of
innovators, and of economic creators.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 531, the
previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended, and on the
amendment by the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).
The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
California (Mr. McKeon).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 189,
nays 231, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 611]
YEAS--189
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NAYS--231
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Cantor
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hensarling
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--11
Berkley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Dicks
Hinojosa
Porter
Towns
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2
minutes remain in this vote.
{time} 1518
Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Ms. HIRONO and Messrs. CAPUANO,
ELLSWORTH and PENCE changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN and Messrs. SHUSTER, NEUGEBAUER and BACHUS changed
their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Roskam
Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. ROSKAM. I am, in its current form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Roskam moves to recommit the bill H.R. 2669 to the
Committee on Education and
[[Page H7556]]
Labor with instructions to report the same back to the House
promptly with an amendment providing that a borrower who is a
full-time elected public official who receives compensation
for such elected position, or who is a registered lobbyist at
either the Federal or State level who receives compensation
for lobbying activities, shall be ineligible for any of the
loan forgiveness programs included in the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Roskam) is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his
motion.
Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, I offer this motion to recommit with
instructions, and it surrounds the general topic of student loan
forgiveness. As we know, student loan forgiveness programs seek to help
students with the cost of college or encourage them to enter a
particular occupation or field.
This was first put in place back in 1958 in the National Defense
Education Act, and it was reenacted and made part of the Perkins loan
program, and it provides forgiveness largely for borrowers who are
employed in a specific public service job, including teachers, but over
the years has added others as well.
I would like to read a short list of those who are currently eligible
under various programs for student loan forgiveness. They include:
Public school teachers; Head Start staff, whether teachers or not;
special education teachers; military members in combat areas;
volunteers in the Peace Corps; law enforcement officers; correction
officers; teachers in specific areas who are teaching in math, science,
foreign language or bilingual education; nurses; medical technicians;
child care providers; family service agency workers; researchers at
NIH; health professionals in the National Health Service Corps;
AmeriCorp volunteers; National Civilian Corps volunteers; and VISTA
volunteers.
These loan forgiveness programs are so popular, in fact, that 43
States currently have them. Congressional Research Service not long ago
surveyed a whole host of financial aid officials across the country and
came to the conclusion that these are very effective programs in
meeting students' financial needs and particular workforce needs.
Earlier this year, the House took on the challenge to expand loan
forgiveness for prosecutors and public defenders, and clearly there is
a good public purpose behind that.
But now under the bill, Mr. Speaker, basically anyone who works for
the government or a nonprofit organization would be eligible for loan
forgiveness. I repeat that. Basically anyone who works for the
government or a nonprofit organization would be eligible for loan
forgiveness. So what does that mean? Does that mean that Members of
Congress would be eligible for loan forgiveness? I don't know about
you, Mr. Speaker, but nobody sent me here to expand loan forgiveness
eligibility for Members of Congress. And, in fact, Members of Congress
are eligible under this bill.
Are members of State legislatures eligible for loan forgiveness under
this bill? Yes.
Are registered lobbyists who work for nonprofit organizations, are
they eligible? Yes.
Mr. Speaker, I would like us to look at some of the CEOs of nonprofit
organizations and reflect on their compensation and how that would play
into this eligibility question. According to the Charity Navigator, the
former head of Planned Parenthood Federation of America made over half
a million dollars, $500,000, and would that person be eligible? Yes, as
would John Adams, the president of the Natural Resources Defense
Counsel who makes almost $300,000 a year. The National Journal reported
in 2004 that the median compensation for think tanks was $264,000 a
year. Or how about this, $227,000 for education, government and welfare
organizations.
Does anybody really believe that these individuals need this kind of
support from the taxpayers? My point is that this new blanket program
for nonprofit organizations will give a number of well-to-do
individuals a government handout that they don't need and our
constituents should not have to fund.
So the real question is whether this is the highest and best use of
taxpayer dollars. Mr. Speaker, I would submit that it is not, so this
motion to recommit is very simple. It would prohibit a borrower who is
an elected full-time public official and is paid for that position, as
well as a paid registered lobbyist at either the State or Federal
level, from receiving any of the loan forgiveness available under this
act, period. Very simple, very clear.
I think we should speak clearly to the American taxpayers that we as
elected officials are not trying to create some unfair advantage for
ourselves, that we are not trying to reward ourselves, or our elected
colleagues, nor any registered lobbyist, by giving away their hard-
earned taxpayer dollars to pay off student debts.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment or to at
least set some parameters of this big government program under this
bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to
the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit
says this will not allow a public officeholder or a lobbyist to get
loan forgiveness. This has never been raised, and if you don't want
them to get it, write me a letter and we will take care of it.
But what this does is this says that you must report this back
promptly, so this kills this bill. This kills this bill. The greatest
contribution to helping families pay for education since the GI bill,
they want to kill it. Cutting interest rates in half for middle-income
families, they want to kill it. You could have written the motion
another way. You deliberately wrote it this way so you could kill this
bill.
What is it you don't like about this bill? You don't like the fact
that while you were in power, after years of flatlining the Pell Grant,
we finally have given the biggest increase in decades for the poorest
kids in the country. You don't like that, so you want to kill the bill.
You don't like the fact that we are going to take 5 million middle-
class kids and extend to them a loan with an interest rate that is cut
in half while their families are struggling to get them through
college. They are making sacrifices every year. You are going to do
this. You are going to kill this bill? Are you proud of this amendment
that you are going to try to kill this bill? Say it louder, that you
are proud.
What about loan forgiveness? This amendment supposedly is about loan
forgiveness, but in the process, they kill loan forgiveness to
firefighters and policemen and nurses and teachers of special education
and people who hold our society together and make it work, they kill
that. What is it they don't like about having a society that can help
its children? What is it they don't like about partnering up with
families who want to help pay their kids' education, that borrow money,
that are told every day they have to save more for this education, and
here we are giving them loan forgiveness. We are giving them loan
forgiveness because they have chosen to go into a career that doesn't
pay very well. We are giving them an interest rate cut that will save
them $4,000. That loan forgiveness will save them $5,000.
We are raising the amount of money that they can borrow, no great
gift to their parents, money that they can borrow, but they don't have
to go to the private market and pay 15 percent. They can pay 3.8
percent.
{time} 1530
That's what this legislation is about. What is it you don't
understand about the American people's vision? Mr. Speaker, what is it
they don't understand about the American people's vision for this
country? What is it you don't understand that America wants to go in a
new direction? What is it you don't understand about this vision of the
future where we have faith in our children, where they have the
confidence of their parents; they have the vision that their kids can
succeed, that they can be the next generation of discoverers, of
innovators, of those who create economic opportunities and hire other
people or get hired?
That's the vision America wants, and it needs help to pay for that
education, and this is what this legislation does. That's what this
legislation does.
Yes, we help those minority-serving institutions. I guess you don't
like that either.
[[Page H7557]]
And yes, we thought we would partner up with some of the richest
people in the world who said that if you partner up, we think we can
raise hundreds of millions of dollars for poor children. So we said,
you raise $1, we'll match it with 50 cents. They're now telling us they
think they can raise hundreds of millions of dollars of private money.
Sounds kind of Republican to me, but what the hell, I don't know.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. We've even got a multiplier in this
bill. We tell high-achieving college students who are studying math,
science and engineering, if you will commit to going in and teaching in
the most difficult schools in this Nation, you will bring those talents
to those kids, we'll give you $4,000 tuition relief while you're in
school, not later. We know that that is a multiplier because we know
the kids that are exposed to highly qualified and effective teachers
can learn things that we can't believe of, and that's what gives back
to this society.
At the end of the day, maybe Speaker Pelosi said it best: The dollars
we invest in this legislation, the dollars we invest in these young
people, that we invest in their families, in their futures, in their
competencies, comes back to us every year from the same group of people
as they graduate. They return the gifts. They return this gift of the
Nation.
We're trying to do for this next generation, what my grandparents did
for me, what my parents did for me. And those investments that they
made in the college systems of this country, in the GI bill in this
country, what did they do? They took America to the premier position in
the world in economic leadership, in national security, in foreign
affairs, took us to the first place in the world and has been there for
50 years based upon that investment.
America knows now that they need a new investment, and that's what
this legislation is about. It's about a new investment for the next
generation, the next generation of talent and competency and fearless
and beautiful young people, beautiful young people who want their
future to be as rewarding as all of ours have been. I ask you to vote
``no'' on this amendment.
Parliamentary Inquiries
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may state his parliamentary
inquiry.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. If this motion
to recommit is passed, it does not kill the legislation; does it not
simply send it back to committee?
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Kills the legislation today.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will not interpret the motion.
That is for Members to debate, not the Chair.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his parliamentary
inquiry.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Is the question I just asked not a procedure of
this House as far as the Speaker is in control of this body, would he
not be learned enough to know that if this motion passed, would it--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair does not interpret a pending
proposal.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Further parliamentary inquiry, if I read the motion
to recommit correctly--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair can affirm that the motion does
not contemplate a report forthwith.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I'm sorry, sir?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Which part of that did the gentleman not
understand?
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Your answer.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The motion does not contemplate a report
forthwith.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. State your parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. If it's true that you don't have the facts right,
you should just beat the podium?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is out of order.
For what purpose does the gentleman from California rise?
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. The Chair responded to the
parliamentary inquiry that it is not forthwith, that it precludes
action on the bill today. Thank you.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a
5-minute vote on passage of H.R. 2669, if ordered, and suspending the
rules and passing H.R. 556.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 199,
noes 223, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 612]
AYES--199
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jindal
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOES--223
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
[[Page H7558]]
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--9
Bartlett (MD)
Berkley
Blumenauer
Boehner
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Hinojosa
Porter
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised there
are 2 minutes remaining on this vote.
{time} 1553
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded
vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 273,
noes 149, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 613]
AYES--273
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Gordon
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hayes
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jindal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOES--149
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Flake
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiberi
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--9
Berkley
Blumenauer
Boehner
Clarke
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Hinojosa
Porter
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised there
are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 1601
Mr. SULLIVAN changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 613, the final passage of the
College Cost Reduction Act, a bill I am proud to have been helpful in
crafting, I was unavoidably detained. If I had been present, I would
have proudly voted ``aye.''
____________________