[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 132 (Thursday, September 17, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2310-E2311]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           STUDENT AID AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 2009

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. TODD TIAHRT

                               of kansas

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 16, 2009

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under

[[Page E2311]]

     consideration the bill (H.R. 3221) to amend the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes:

  Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3221, the 
Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act because it will increase our 
deficit, but not help Americans with the expense of college. This bill 
is just one more area where the President and his party's leadership in 
the House are seeking to take over private industry. This is yet 
another one-size-fits-all government program intended to cripple the 
private sector and force additional financial risk on the American 
taxpayer.
  In the last few months, we have watched the national debt level grow 
at an unprecedented rate. We spent billions of dollars bailing out the 
automobile industry. We have thrown good money after bad to prop up 
portions of the financial sector that we are told are ``too big to 
fail.'' We've bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, only to watch the 
housing industry continue to flounder. We have spent more than $780 
billion on a stimulus package that has left us with higher unemployment 
than we had before the bill. And in the next few weeks, we will need to 
raise the debt ceiling again.
  Claims that this bill will save the nation billions of dollars look 
like a budget gimmick to pay for new government programs. Government 
has grown enough in recent years. We need to be looking for ways to 
save money and reduce our deficit, not spend ``projected savings'' on 
new, duplicative programs.
  Furthermore, the money that supporters claim will be made available 
by these budget gimmicks is only expected to cover the first five years 
of these new programs. After that, Congress will be forced to find 
alternative sources of funding for them, or eliminate them. This is as 
productive as a credit card offering no payments for six months. This 
is a very poor way to manage the finances of the nation.
  A second big problem I see with H.R. 3221 is the federalization of 
the student loan industry. If we run out of money for this program in 
the future, what happens to the students? With no private lenders, the 
students are left without any other source of funding for their 
education.
  Fifteen years ago, when the federal government first got involved in 
the business of providing student loans, Congress was told that this 
was not an attempt for the federal government to take over the student 
loan industry, but simply a way to improve the system, and provide 
``competition'' to the private sector. Yet, fifteen years later, here 
we are, debating a bill that would force private lenders out of the 
industry.
  Does this argument sound familiar? It should. These are the same 
explanations being offered today by the President and by Democrat 
leaders in the House and Senate on health care. We are told that the 
bill will not lead to a government takeover of health care. Proponents 
say that a ``government option'' will simply compete, not replace, 
private health insurance plans. But I wonder, if the health care bill 
were to pass, how long would it be before this body is having a similar 
vote to eliminate private health insurance plans.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in voting against this bill. This is 
a big government takeover of a private industry that will saddle 
taxpayers with the risk of billions in additional debt, while shrinking 
access to resources for future generations of students. In short, Madam 
Speaker, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

                          ____________________