Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 116 (Wednesday, July 23, 2014)

[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 116 (Wednesday, July 23, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H6672-H6679]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3136, ADVANCING COMPETENCY-BASED
EDUCATION DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ACT OF 2013, AND PROVIDING FOR
CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4984, EMPOWERING STUDENTS THROUGH ENHANCED
FINANCIAL COUNSELING ACT

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call
up House Resolution 677 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 677

Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule
XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 3136) to establish a demonstration program for
competency-based education. The first reading of the bill
shall be dispensed with. All points of order against
consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be
confined to the bill and amendments specified in this section
and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled
by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Education and the Workforce. After general debate the bill
shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.
In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute
recommended by the Committee on Education and the Workforce
now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as
an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-
minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute
consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 113-52. That
amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered
as read. All points of order against that amendment in the
nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to that
amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order
except those printed in part A of the report of the Committee
on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment
may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may
be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall
be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the
proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment,
and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All
points of order against such amendments are waived. At the
conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the
Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with
such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may
demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted
in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the amendment
in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text.
The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
bill and amendments thereto to final passage without
intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or
without instructions.
Sec. 2. At any time after adoption of this resolution the
Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare
the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on
the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R.
4984) to amend the loan counseling requirements under the
Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes. The
first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points
of order against consideration of the bill are waived.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not
exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and
the Workforce. After general debate the bill shall be
considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. In lieu
of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on Education and the Workforce now printed in
the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original
bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule
an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the
text of Rules Committee Print 113-53. That amendment in the
nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All
points of order against that amendment in the nature of a
substitute are waived. No amendment to that amendment in the
nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed
in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules
accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be
offered only in the order printed in the report, may be
offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be
considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified
in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent
and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall
not be subject to a demand for division of the question in
the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of
order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion
of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee
shall rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a
separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the
Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the
nature of a substitute made in order as original text. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill
and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from North Carolina is
recognized for 1 hour.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis),
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.

General Leave

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have
5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 677 provides for structured rules for
consideration of H.R. 3136, the Advancing Competency-Based Education
Demonstration Project Act, and H.R. 4984, the Empowering Students
Through Enhanced Financial Counseling Act.
The Rules Committee was pleased to work with Members on both sides of
the aisle to provide for floor consideration of a number of their
amendments. The resolution makes in order 11 amendments to H.R. 3136
and seven amendments to H.R. 4984. In total, the committee made in
order nine Democrat amendments, three Republican amendments, and six
bipartisan amendments.
As a member of the Rules Committee, it is a privilege to see the
number of amendments we have been able to make in order this Congress
and the openness of the legislative process. My hope is that we will
continue to work together in a bipartisan fashion to advance good
legislation.
My colleagues on the House Education and the Workforce Committee and
I have been working to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. We have
held 14 hearings and invited dozens of witnesses to discuss a wide
variety of issues facing students, families, and institutions of higher
education.
Since the last reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, the
landscape has been constantly evolving with the student population
rapidly changing and institutions developing more cost-effective modes
for delivering academic content.
The upcoming reauthorization provides policymakers an opportunity to
improve the law and strengthen America's postsecondary system to ensure
Federal policies are flexible enough to allow future developments and
innovations to occur.
Based on feedback received from the public and the committee's desire
to reform the law in a way that will assist students in obtaining an
affordable higher education that leads to employment opportunities, the
committee will promote reforms that adhere to the following principles:
empowering students and families to make informed decisions;
simplifying and improving student aid; promoting innovation, access,
and completion; and ensuring strong accountability and a limited
Federal role.
Reform will help more Americans achieve their dreams of a
postsecondary education and help secure a more prosperous future for
the country.
The rule before us today provides for consideration of two bills that
will inform the reauthorization process. H.R. 3136 creates a
demonstration project for competency-based education. Competency-based
education allows students to demonstrate what they already know and
learn at their own pace

[[Page H6673]]

by mastering specific skills and knowledge that translate to real-world
application for their degrees.
H.R. 4984 ensures that students have the information needed to make
good choices with their financial aid dollars and understand how to use
that money well by increased financial counseling and services.

{time} 1245

Education is a great opportunity in this country, and we have the
most diverse system of postsecondary education in the world, with more
than 6,000 public, private, nonprofit, and proprietary institutions of
higher education. This diversity affords students from all backgrounds
an opportunity to find an institution that meets their unique needs and
helps them pursue personal goals of continuing their education.
The rule before us today starts that reform process, and I urge my
colleagues to vote in favor of the rule and the underlying bills.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding me the
customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the two underlying bills, H.R. 3136,
the Advancing Competency-Based Education Demonstration Project Act of
2013, and H.R. 4984, the Empowering Students Through Enhanced Financial
Counseling Act. I do rise in opposition to the rule for reasons that I
will go into regarding preventing us from addressing many of the major
issues within public education and higher education.
While I am supportive of these two bills, I am disappointed that the
House is not embarking on a full reauthorization of the Higher
Education Act. We can nip around the edges in certainly a constructive
way to reduce costs, as these bills do, to be helpful, but none of them
are game-changers or, dare I say, even a substantial part of making
college more affordable like we could through the reauthorization of
the Higher Education Act.
Since the last reauthorization in 2007, higher education has become
more and more expensive. The cost of attending a university per student
has risen by almost five times the rate of inflation since 1983. At the
very time that an advanced degree is more important than ever for
somebody to have a good job in today's increasingly complex global
economy, it is getting further and further from the price range and
affordability for American middle class families.
While a 4-year university isn't always the best choice, some form of
postsecondary education is increasingly important--whether that is
community college, whether it is a certification program--to be able to
ensure that young people, and people of all ages, have access to a
good-paying job in the 21st century workforce. Only by pursuing a full
scale reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, soliciting ideas
from Democrats and Republicans across the aisle, can we truly be able
to help put college more in reach for students. As many of my
colleagues from across the aisle say, we need to examine how or if many
of the student loan programs only contribute to the increasingly high
cost of college education. We need to take ideas from our side of the
aisle, including some that I cosponsor regarding reducing textbook
costs or looking at new and better ways that we can look at income-
based repayment for student loans.
Through a comprehensive reauthorization, we can streamline payments
by replacing our complicated student loan system with a simplified
income-based program, which is part of a bipartisan bill that I sponsor
with Congressman Petri called the ExCEL Act. We could also improve
articulation and transfer agreements so that students can move quickly
and efficiently towards a credential from less expensive community
colleges, if necessary, to colleges that offer 4-year degrees.
Furthermore, Representative Hinojosa's open textbook legislation
would help keep costs down so students can concentrate on their studies
rather than having to work additional jobs just to be able to afford
the textbooks. Finally, we can make sure that we improve accountability
for colleges and universities that are not serving students well so
that our limited Federal resources are used in a way to provide
incentives to States and universities that support public education and
they keep public education, higher education, affordable.
Mr. Speaker, in addition to the Higher Education Act, which this
Congress does not appear to be moving forward on and this bill does not
allow amendments to, our Nation's landmark kindergarten through 12th
grade education law, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act,
sometimes referred to as No Child Left Behind, is long overdue to be
replaced with a new reauthorization.
And this week, I was pleased to hear the President signed another
work product of this body, the Workforce Investment and Opportunity
Act, another long overdue, bipartisan bill to improve our workforce
development system that many of my colleagues on the Education and
Workforce Committee have worked on for many years. That bill started in
a partisan way. The first iteration on the House floor received zero
Democratic votes. The compromise, however, received the support of
every Democrat and nearly every Republican. It passed by a margin of
415-6.
Just a few months ago, we passed bipartisan bills to substantially
improve the charter schools program and Federal investment in education
research with a strong bipartisan vote. So, Mr. Speaker, this body has
shown it can pass bipartisan Education and Workforce bills. These two
bills coming before us today are additional examples of that. So why
haven't we undertaken the hard work to make a full-fledged bipartisan
effort to reauthorize No Child Left Behind?
Like with the Workforce Investment Act, we had a partisan version
come to the floor. Not a single Democrat voted for it, just as not a
single Democrat voted for the first iteration of the Workforce
Investment Act. Anybody can pass partisan legislation that no one else
supports, but that is not a constructive step towards lawmaking.
Lawmaking entails making the tough decisions, working with the other
side to create a work product. Again, with WIA, we had a 415-6 vote.
With No Child Left Behind, whether it is that high or not, let's get a
majority of Democrats and Republicans working together to reauthorize
it. They began that hard work in the Senate Health Committee, where
they have a bipartisan education reform bill that they have not brought
to the full floor of the Senate, but at least they began that work of
working in a bipartisan manner towards replacing No Child Left Behind
with a new Federal education law.
This bill which passed the House, the Student Success Act, the
Republican-only education bill, was opposed by Democrats for many
reasons. First of all, it would have locked in education funding at
sequester levels. Secondly, it would have locked many of our critical
programs that support STEM, literacy, and the arts, support English
language learners, and left students trapped in failing schools with
little recourse for action. It was opposed not only by Democrats but
also by the Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, and also
every major education organization.
This process was unlike all other previous efforts to reauthorize the
ESEA, when under the strong leadership of my colleagues, like now-
Speaker Boehner and Ranking Member Miller, Democrats and Republicans
came together to strengthen and improve our education system. As
Ranking Member Miller enters retirement, with his last year in the
House, we need to learn from his success in building consensus and
forging compromise, in keeping students across our country first to
ensure that we get the most bang for our buck with our limited Federal
investment and students and young people receive the skills they need
to compete in the 21st century workforce.

I urge my colleagues to recognize that our opportunity to build on
the success of No Child Left Behind, which shined a light on the
achievement gaps for minority and low-income students, is now, more
than ever, critical. But just as it had successes, it also had failures
that are recognized across the aisle. The superficial formula for
adequate yearly progress is defended by nobody, and yet continues to be
the law of the land.

[[Page H6674]]

I hope that this body can come together, just as we have for WIA, for
charter schools, for ESRA, just as we are doing for the bills we are
considering today, to update and improve the ESEA. That is what our
students deserve and what we were elected to do. Rather than let these
bills we are passing today stand out as an aberration, let us build
upon them, let them form momentum for higher ed reauthorization and
ESEA reauthorization so we can begin the substantive work that the
voters of this country have hired us to do.
Despite the fact that we are not considering a full reauthorization
of the Higher Education Act, despite the fact that we are not
considering a full reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, I am
nevertheless pleased that we are considering H.R. 3136, a bill that I
coauthored with Representative Salmon. This bill allows innovative
colleges and universities to shorten the time and cost of earning a
degree through self-paced programs based on learning rather than seat
time. This innovation, called competency-based education, allows
students to work at their own pace and earn credit by mastering the
knowledge, rather than sitting in a seat and, let's be honest,
sometimes not even being awake. This growing trend of innovation around
competency-based education is particularly important because it
provides a way to increase innovation and reduce the costs of a college
degree.
Today's students come to college with different backgrounds and learn
at different rates and different times of day. The competency-based
education program allows an institution to tailor a program of study to
an individual student. By measuring and assessing competencies, or what
a student can demonstrate that they know, students are guaranteed to
matriculate with the knowledge of the skills they need to master.
Businesses will know what to expect upon hiring these students, and
students will be incentivized to learn as quickly and as inexpensively
as they can.
While the Department of Education currently has some latitude to
explore this model through the experimental sites' programs, the
current regulations need to be updated and streamlined to better
support these innovative programs, which is what this bill does.
I am proud to say that in my district, institutions like Colorado
State University's Global Campus are demonstrating that online public
universities with competency-based programs can lead the way in
attracting, educating, and graduating young learners and adult learners
to succeed in the 21st century workforce. But CSU-Global and programs
like it currently need to adhere to existing higher education
structure, which limits the schedules of students and limits when
students can achieve financial aid because traditional higher education
is based on the Carnegie unit, or credit hour, rather than what the
students learn.
As Congress considers the reauthorization of the Higher Education
Act, this project, this innovation that this bill will unleash is more
crucial than ever. In 1998, Congress recognized the importance of the
growing trend towards distance education and the opportunity for
students to learn online. Now once again, we have the opportunity to
learn from, to study, and to innovate around competency-based
education, to learn about the changes that we need to make to maintain
quality, to reduce costs, and to increase the number of students that
have access to these programs.
That is why I was proud to work with Representative Salmon, Chairman
Kline, Ranking Member Miller, and Ms. Foxx on this legislation, which
would permit institutions to waive certain regulations that stand in
the way of them adopting a competency-based model. We will learn a lot.
We will learn what works, and we will learn what doesn't work. They are
both important as we seek to expand innovation across the higher
education sector to reduce costs and increase quality.
This legislation will allow Congress and the general public to learn
more about the opportunities that competency-based education offers for
students to increase access and opportunity in higher education.
I am also pleased that the House is considering under this rule H.R.
4984, the Empowering Students Through Enhanced Financial Counseling
Act. Financial counseling is an important method for students to learn
about the most effective and least expensive way for them to finance
their higher education, both before, during, and after their college
experience. Many students simply don't have the knowledge or the
resources or the help to make sound decisions in their own interests
about their opportunities to finance their postsecondary education.
To the degree that we don't provide a high quality standard of
counseling, first-generation students in particular are the students
who stand to benefit the most from improving access to higher education
and they often lose out. H.R. 4984 makes many improvements to our
financial counseling obligations under current law. The bill ensures
that all students and parents who participate in the Federal loan
program receive proactive counseling each year that is personalized to
meet their own financial needs. Students will receive information about
the terms and conditions of Pell Grants and various other loan
programs. The bipartisan bill also directs the Secretary of Education
to create and disseminate online tools to provide annual loan
counseling, helping to bring our financial aid counseling system into
the 21st century and put useful, relevant information into the hands of
students.
One place in particular that financial counseling can play an
important role is when determining whether to take out Federal loans or
private student loans. Private student loans often have variable
interest rates, as high or higher than 14 percent. They are not
eligible for the important deferment, income-based repayment, or loan
forgiveness options that come with Federal student loans, but half of
private student loan borrowers borrowed less than they could have in
Federal Stafford loans. So without realizing it in many cases, people
are turning to the higher priced, less beneficial private market place
when they still have unused capacity on the Federal student loan side.
It is clear that there is an information gap and students need
information about the terms and conditions of these loans.
That is why I am thrilled that this underlying bill contains an
important part of my Know Before You Owe Act, which I first introduced
last session and reintroduced this session, along with Representative
Bishop and Representative Schwartz, to ensure that financial counseling
includes additional disclosures on private education loans, with
information about college financing options and warnings about riskier
private loans to help students make informed decisions about their
choices so that they get the best deal that is available to them under
current law.

{time} 1300

I am also pleased the underlying bill will improve exit counseling
for student loan repayment. Unfortunately, many students default on
what could otherwise be manageable levels of debt because they don't
understand the payment options.
The ExCEL Act, which I mentioned earlier and introduced with
Representative Petri, would make simple income-based repayment the
default option, which will reduce paperwork and administrative overhead
and prevent this unfortunate occurrence and make payments more
affordable for students.
The bill will help students understand that they have many options to
pay back their loans and help them make the choice that is best for
them.
These bills are a step forward, but affording college education
requires a lot more progress than a full step. We need to make enormous
progress to reverse the trend of the last few decades that have led to
five times the cost of college inflation adjusted since 1983.
I wish I could be here before you to say that these bills will fix
that. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to say that they will help, but they
alone will not turn around the alarming trend that is making college
harder and harder for middle class families to afford.
So while I support these bills as a step forward, I oppose the rule
and call upon this body to allow a full and open debate on the Higher
Education Act on ESEA.
I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H6675]]

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Salmon), the prime sponsor on one of these bills.
Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the
underlying bill, H.R. 3136, the Advancing Competency-Based Education
Demonstration Project of 2014.
I would like to thank Chairman Kline and the subcommittee Chairwoman
Foxx for their support and work on this legislation. I am really
appreciative of Representative Polis and all of his fine work. This
truly is a bipartisan bill.
I would also like to state how proud I am to be part of a body that
has actually taken its job very, very seriously for the hard times that
most Americans have fallen upon, and I am proud that over the course of
the last year and a half since I rejoined the Congress, that we passed
over 320 bills--40 of them that would create jobs in this economy
immediately--that are languishing in the Majority Leader of the
Senate's drawer and have no action taken.
A lot of the American public are frustrated, and they have gone to
calling this the do-nothing Congress. Well, let me tell you, half the
Congress--the House--is actually doing its work.
When it comes to the appropriation bills, which we are required by
our rules and our laws to do every year, the House will have done its
duty by the end of this year in passing all the appropriation bills. I
think we have done 10 of them so far. I believe the Senate hasn't done
any.
So I think that when it comes to dealing with the cost of higher
education, this is a big step in the right direction. We are aware of
the cost of higher education. It has grown by more than 500 percent
since 1985 compared to an overall inflation rate of 121 percent.
Federal regulations greatly impede the efforts to reduce the cost of
a college degree. As a result, we have got to implement policies to
allow institutions to be innovative in developing new models of
education, instead of continuing with the status quo because the status
quo is not working.
That is why I introduced the Advancing Competency-Based Education
Demonstration Project of 2014 with my colleagues Representative Polis
and Representative Brooks.
This important bipartisan legislation will set up a pilot project to
allow institutions to more easily develop innovative ways to deliver
education to their students. H.R. 3136 is the first step in allowing
students to earn a degree and enter the job market sooner based on
their knowledge and their skill set, rather than seat time in the
classroom.
My bill will direct the Secretary of Education to implement a
demonstration project and to waive regulatory requirements that impede
innovations that might decrease costs to students.
The program would allow colleges to provide college credit to
students who can prove competencies through prior work and life
experience, rather than a specified amount of time in the classroom.
In our field hearing that we held in Arizona, two of our college
presidents from Arizona State University and the University of Arizona
said that this will immensely help them to be able to get students
through their degree programs quicker, based on their competency.
They all agreed that the group of people that it will probably help
more than anybody else in America are our returning veterans because
they come with certain skill sets that they don't get credit for.
I would like to just talk 1 minute about how that process works
because I had it work in my life. I served a mission for my church to
Taiwan when I was a young man, and I came back fluent in Mandarin and
Chinese.
It didn't make a lot of sense for me to go through Chinese 101 and
learn how to say ``where is the bathroom'' with the other kids when I
could already speak fluent Mandarin and Chinese.
I was able to test out of that by demonstrating my competency of
already being fluent in the language, and I got just about an entire
semester's worth of credit.
That is what we are talking about here. People who have been in the
military, people who have been in other jobs that they have had, where
they have been able to learn skills that don't necessarily translate
into book work, but they are a lot more proficient at those skills than
a lot of kids entering the classroom. This is going to cut through a
lot of the garbage and allow people to be able to get those degrees
earlier and, thereby, reducing their costs.
This legislation passed out of the Education and the Workforce
Committee by a voice vote, and it allows higher education institutions
to explore more innovative ways to deliver education, measure quality,
and disperse financial aid based on actual learning, again, rather than
seat time.
It provides flexibility to the schools looking to provide students a
more personalized, cost-effective education, and I think that is what
we are all here for.
I thank the Speaker for entertaining my ideas, and I thank the
gentlewoman for giving me the time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will
offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 4582, Mr. Tierney's
bill, to enable millions of students, graduates, and parents in middle
class families to responsibly finance their existing student loans.
To discuss our proposal, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney), the ranking member of the Education and
the Workforce Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I did file an amendment to this bill that would be
considered today. Quite simply, what it does is provide existing
student loan borrowers the opportunity to responsibly refinance their
high-interest debt to a lower-interest obligation, like homeowners and
car owners are able to do all the time.

The amendment is based on legislation that I filed here in the House
and my colleague, Elizabeth Warren, filed over in the Senate. We have
over 130 cosponsors here in the House and dozens of respected
educational groups and diverse organizations in support of this
measure.
The amendment would help students and parents save some real money.
In fact, the Congressional Research Service says that a middle class
undergraduate student with an average loan debt would save over $4,000
over the life of the loan and a typical graduate student would save
more than $2,500 and the parent who borrowed money to help pay for
their child's education would save more than $3,500.
Mr. Speaker, these are real savings, real dollars, and no doubt, they
are going to be directly invested back into the community. The Center
for American Progress estimated that refinancing just the Federal
student loans, not the parents' loans on that, would pump $21 billion
back into the economy.
It helps taxpayers too. The Congressional Budget Office--nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office--said that, over 10 years, it would save
taxpayers $22 billion.
So the proposal is a good deal for taxpayers, it is a good deal for
students and parents, and it is a good deal for the economy. The real
question here is: Why isn't there an urgency to move this legislation?
Because the benefits to the economy are huge and the savings for
taxpayers are real--despite all this, the Republican leadership blocked
this amendment from coming to the floor for consideration today.
By blocking that amendment, the Republican leadership has denied
every Member in this Chamber the ability to vote on this important
measure and show that they are standing with the people--with the
students, with the parents, with the economy at large for people who
want to take benefit of this legislation.
Worse, by blocking this amendment, the Republican leadership denies
relief to tens of millions of college students and parents and middle
class families across the country who would benefit from the provisions
of the bill that we would offer.
Mr. Speaker, that is unacceptable, but unfortunately, it is becoming
more and more common in the House here, as it looks like Republicans
refuse to stand with middle class families and those that aspire to the
middle class, instead of putting politics before everything.
Instead of debating my amendment and the provisions of it that would
help

[[Page H6676]]

middle class families, Republicans are finding some way to sue the
President of the United States.
If you were to take that measure and ask the public: Would you rather
have some relief and allow people to be able to write down and
refinance their loans to a more reasonable interest rate as parents, as
undergraduate students, graduate students, and parents of students--
would you rather do that, or would you rather pursue some suit against
the President which doesn't make any sense and isn't going to have any
effect and doesn't work to get them real relief in things that matter
to them in their lifetime today?
We are not doing what we should be doing this afternoon, Mr. Speaker.
We should be putting politics aside. We should be allowing this
amendment. We should rely on every Member of this House to vote on it.
I believe that we would get a strong bipartisan vote of support if we
did that. I ask my colleagues to not vote on the previous question, to
allow us to insert this amendment, and move forward.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I believe the gentleman from Massachusetts is
quite well aware that his amendment was not germane to this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Royce).
Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Education and the
Workforce Committee for bringing up H.R. 4984, the Empowering Students
Through Enhanced Financial Counseling Act. I urge my colleagues to
support this bipartisan bill.
Within the past year, I have held two Paying for College Workshops in
my district. These district events have attracted hundreds of parents
and students. I have noticed that parents take more careful notes
during these workshops, but all of them were eager--all who attended
were eager to learn about how to finance college tuition, from the free
application for Federal student aid, to understanding the multiple
grant and loan programs. Many students and parents struggle to
understand this very complicated process.
I think that that is why this bill is important, the Empowering
Students Through Enhanced Financial Counseling Act. With total student
debt now over $1 trillion, it is critical to equip students and parents
with proper interactive counseling, so that they have the knowledge to
make responsible and informed decisions when borrowing.
Understanding the terms and conditions for the Pell grants,
understanding what an individual's financial obligations are after
graduating, these are key to helping students and parents understand
and manage financial health well beyond college.
I, again, would like to thank Representative Brett Guthrie and
Representative Suzanne Bonamici for their joint work on this bill. I
would like to express my support, not only for their bipartisan
endeavor, but for the other higher education bills before the floor
this week. These bills work to strengthen our education policy.
An education is one of the most important investments an individual
can make. We must ensure that students and parents are able to make
financially responsible choices. We must make sure they understand
about Pell grants and other such programs available to them, along with
the other higher education bills before this floor.
Let's improve the current system. I urge my colleagues to support the
bill.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa), the ranking member of the
Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and
Workforce Training.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support
of H.R. 5134, legislation which would reauthorize two advisory
committees within the U.S. Department of Education for 1 year.
The National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and
Integrity, known as NACIQI, and the Advisory Committee on Student
Financial Assistance play vitally important advisory roles to the
Secretary of Education and Congress and would not otherwise be extended
through the General Education Provisions Act when the Higher Ed Act
expires this year.
NACIQI, for example, advises the Secretary of Education on matters
related to postsecondary education accreditation and the certification
process for higher ed institutions to participate in Federal student
aid programs.
The Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance provides
advice and counsel on Federal student financial aid policy to both
Congress and the Secretary of Education, including the recommendations
for increasing college access and persistence to higher ed for low-
income and moderate-income students.
As ranking member of the Subcommittee on Higher Education and
Workforce Training, I want to thank Chairman Kline, Ranking Member
George Miller, and Ranking Member Foxx for their leadership on this
issue.
Although I will continue to fight for a more comprehensive
reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, I believe that this bill,
as well as the other three higher education bills being voted on this
week, make some key improvements to the Higher Education Act.
So with that, I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R.
5134.

{time} 1315

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the higher education landscape in America is changing to
meet the demands of the ever more technologically engaged student
population, as well as meeting the needs of adults who are coming back
to college after some time in the workforce.
One of the most exciting innovations is competency-based education,
which takes traditional degrees and college courses and maps them to
specific skill sets or knowledge pieces, known as ``competencies.'' A
student progresses through a course by mastering these skill sets and
obtaining the knowledge to prove they understand the concept.
Many of these students are individuals returning to college after an
interrupted first attempt where they dropped out of college. As Mr.
Salmon said, many are veterans with skills that have not yet been
equated to coursework. Now they hope to improve their skills and
further their careers, but these adults have already been learning
skills along the way through their jobs and life experiences.
Competency-based education allows students to move quickly through
concepts they understand and spend more time focusing on skills that
they need.
Additionally, many of these programs apply the skills or concepts to
real-world problems that students may have faced in their workplaces or
in their families, which helps create a habit of continual learning and
application.
While well-intentioned, Federal regulation has often gotten in the
way of innovative programs because it cannot account for the rapid
change taking place. That is why my colleague, Representative Matt
Salmon, has authored H.R. 3136, the Advancing Competency-Based
Education Demonstration Project Act. This legislation will promote this
innovation by directing the Secretary of Education to implement pilot
projects for competency-based programs that will deliver greater
flexibility to institutions that want to provide students with a more
personalized education experience.
The bill will ensure accountability by requiring annual evaluations
of each of these projects to determine program quality and ensure
student achievement. My hope is that these projects will better inform
our reauthorization of the Higher Education Act by giving us proven
results of what works and what does not work in the current regulatory
framework. Additionally, it will help inform our discussions around
financial aid and what learning in the 21st century classroom looks
like.
I worked in higher education for many years and thought these changes
were imminent long ago, but higher education change in the past has
occurred at a leisurely pace. It is exciting today finally to see some
of the ideas and concepts that have been around for years being more
widely tested and finding success.
In our country, there are 4.6 million jobs going unfilled because
employers are not able to find individuals with the right skill sets to
meet their needs. As these individuals come back to school to improve
their skills, we should find ways to recognize and give credit for what
they have already learned to help them move through the

[[Page H6677]]

process more quickly. This bill will help students do just that by
providing flexibility to institutions to create programs that meet
those needs and holding them accountable for the results.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the
underlying bills, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa), my esteemed colleague and the
ranking member of the Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on
Higher Education and Workforce Training.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I also rise today to express my strong
support for H.R. 4983, the Strengthening Transparency in Higher
Education Act.
The underlying bill strengthens data transparency in higher education
by establishing a new college dashboard Web site, which replaces the
Network Navigator and ensures the inclusion of nontraditional students
and data metrics.
The college dashboard Web site will provide better and more
accessible information for students and families. Key information will
consist of enrollment and completion data on full-time and part-time
students, disaggregated by Pell recipients; by race, ethnicity, and
disability; as well as information on net price, average student loan
debt, and the college costs.
This bill promotes transparency on the use of adjunct faculty. For
the first time, our Nation's colleges will be required to report the
ratio of part-time to full-time instructors by degree level.
In addition, this legislation creates a more accessible calculator
with clearer and more individualized information on student costs.
Finally, the bill requires that the college dashboard Web site be
consumer tested with other agencies and students and institutions and
experts to ensure it provides understandable and relevant information.
I am proud to say that Texas has been a leader in this area. The
University of Texas system, for example, has developed an impressive
college productivity dashboard designed to create transparency and to
measure productivity in a more effective way. Above all, the UT
dashboard system also provides students, families, and policymakers
with robust data and information that they can use to make more
informed decisions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Having better data and information has allowed the
University of Texas to identify achievement gaps and to make
improvements in areas that need reform. More accurate data on college
participation and completion, for instance, can help to improve student
outcomes, particularly for low-income students and students of color.
In closing, I applaud Chairman Kline, Ranking Member Miller, and Ms.
Foxx for working in a bipartisan manner to advance this legislation.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of
H.R. 4983.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the other bill to be considered under this rule is H.R.
4984, the Empowering Students Through Enhanced Financial Counseling
Act, which will promote financial literacy through enhanced counseling
for all recipients of Federal financial aid.
Making the decision to pursue postsecondary education can be
challenging, and many students and families find themselves overwhelmed
by the choices and new terminology. It is in the best interest of
students and taxpayers alike that information about Federal aid be
presented in a way that is easily understood.
Additionally, for most students, Federal financial aid provides them
with more money than they are used to handling, and they struggle with
how to manage properly their debt loads and living expenses. Students
want to be treated as independent adults and therefore assume the
responsibility that comes with their choices.
As they make the transition to college, or back to the classroom for
adult learners, this bill seeks to help students make smart decisions
about financing their education so they fully understand the
circumstances they may face at the completion of their education.

This legislation ensures that borrowers, both students and parents,
who participate in the Federal loan programs receive interactive
counseling each year that is personalized to their individual
situation, as well as review their loans each year and consent before
receiving new Federal student loans.
The bill expands financial counseling to include students who receive
a Pell grant, and it also directs the Secretary of Education to
maintain and share a consumer-tested, online counseling tool
institutions can use to provide annual loan and Pell grant counseling
as well as exit counseling.
Mr. Speaker, it may surprise Members in this Chamber that I was the
first person in my family to graduate from high school and go to
college, where I worked full-time and attended school part-time. It
took me 7 years to earn my bachelor's degree, and I continued to work
my way through my master's and doctoral degrees.
From my own experience, I am convinced this is the greatest country
in the world for many reasons, not the least of which is that a person
like me who grew up extremely poor, in a house with no electricity and
with no running water, with parents with very little formal education
and no prestige at all, could work hard and be elected to the United
States House of Representatives.
That is why I am passionate about ensuring that students have the
opportunity to get an education but also understand the responsibility
they are assuming in taking out a loan and the implications it may have
on their family for years to come.
Throughout my career serving low-income, first-generation students, I
know how rewarding an education can be, and this bill provides extra
tools to help those students fully understand their commitments.
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying
bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of
my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately
prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Colorado?
There was no objection.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, this Congress is best characterized by missing
opportunities, whether it is balancing our budget, whether it is
immigration reform, or, in the context of education, which is the
primary issue I work on here on the committee in this institution, the
opportunity to reauthorize and replace No Child Left Behind with a
Federal education policy that works for our country and to replace the
Higher Education Authorization Act with a bill that makes college more
affordable for American families.
Today's considerations, while good bills--and I am particularly
honored to have my bill with Mr. Salmon on the floor of the House, and
I look forward to managing that and discussing its merits later and
encourage a strong bipartisan vote of support--the tragedy is that we
are nibbling around the edges and not dealing with the core of the
issues that the American people demand that Congress deal with.
When we look at congressional approval ratings of 12 percent, we need
go no further in explaining that than the hesitancy of this body to
solve or address any of the major issues that I hear from my
constituents on a daily basis.
If this Congress were serious, we could put H.R. 15, our bipartisan
immigration reform bill, on the floor of this House. I am confident it
would pass. If this body were serious, we could put the Employment
Nondiscrimination Act, a bipartisan bill, on the floor of this House to
prevent companies across our country from firing Americans simply
because of whom they date or love in their private lives, and it would
pass.
We could begin the not easy work but the worthwhile work of working
together, Democrats and Republicans, on reauthorizing ESEA, No Child
Left Behind, and replacing our broken Federal education policy with a
constructive

[[Page H6678]]

approach that works for kids across our country in reauthorizing the
Higher Education Act.
What would be those principles behind reauthorizing the ESEA? I think
there are a lot of good ideas from both sides of the aisle.
When No Child Left Behind was signed into law by George Bush, it was
a step forward for transparency and accountability; but even in the
immediate aftermath, it was clear that Congress didn't get everything
right. Rather than improving it and adjusting it, it has been frozen
like a time capsule from 2001. Secretary Duncan has done what he can
with the broad authority of waivers.
I hope that my Republican colleagues agree that vesting any
administration--not just this President--with that kind of ability
should not be the intent of lawmakers. We should address the flaws in
the act.
I think any President, Democrat or Republican, is doing what they can
with the law such as it is, but the real answer doesn't lie with an
administration. It lies with Congress. It lies in Congress altering and
changing the AYP formula.
What does real accountability look like? Growth over time and how
much students are learning. What should ESEA contain? It should promote
innovation and excellence. It should expand and replicate what works in
public education. The most promising thing we have is that we have
examples of schools that work with at-risk kids from every demographic
that outperform their peers and prepare kids for college and the
workforce.
Finally, we need to change what doesn't work in public education.
So shining a light isn't enough. Having a broad stroke of AYP and
policy levers and penalties that are unconnected to actually improving
schools doesn't work. But we need to begin the difficult work of
turning around persistently failing schools to ensure that every child
across our country has access to a good education.

{time} 1330

That is the work we are not doing. It is the work we are not doing in
this bill. It is the work we haven't done in committee in any
meaningful way, and it joins the litany of issues that I hear about
from my constituents on a daily basis.
Has this Congress balanced the budget? No.
Has the Congress resolved our immigration crisis as we have seen the
temperature increase with the tens of thousands of young people on our
southern border? No, we haven't taken a single step. In fact, this
Congress hasn't even passed or brought to the floor or debated a single
immigration bill.
For a while, we were hearing that there would be a ``piecemeal
approach'' to immigration reform. We are nearing the end of the 113th
Congress, and we haven't seen a single piece. I don't know what kind of
a meal that is, but it is not one that satisfies one's appetite, and it
doesn't satisfy the appetite of the voters not to see Congress deal
with immigration reform, secure our border and replace our broken
immigration system with one that works for our country.
People in the education world--teachers, students, families, school
board members, principals across our country--all know what I hope my
colleagues know, which is that ESEA is broken, that No Child Left
Behind doesn't work. It has flaws that aren't ideological--they aren't
Democrats say this or Republicans say this. It has formulas that don't
make sense to anybody. It is the formula, namely, that declares that
nearly every public school in our country is a failure.
Now, that can be something that some people might want to say
rhetorically, but I don't think you will even find too many Democrats
or Republicans saying that every public school in this country is a
failure. I shouldn't say ``every.'' It is 99 percent or 95 percent of
them. I think there are a few small ones that got through, but AYP sets
up this apparatus that is nearly impossible for schools to meet, which
is requiring that every student cohort achieve proficiency now. It
sounded good. Congress mandated that every student become proficient,
but it shouldn't be a great surprise that it didn't happen, so it is
time to replace that with something that makes sense. If people
rhetorically want to say all public schools are failing on either side
of the aisle, they are welcome to it, but I think we all know that the
reality is more nuanced in that there are good public schools and there
are poorly performing public schools.
The way that you treat and deal with a good public school and public
policy is not to say it is a failing one. You can praise it. You can
say they are doing a great job. You can pat them on the back. You can
certainly challenge them to do more, but that is a very different
policy response to a persistently failing high school where six out of
10 kids who go in the door in ninth grade don't even graduate. That
school is doing their community a disservice and is only increasing the
rampant inequality of opportunity that plagues our country.
Instead of relying on temporary fixes and marginal improvements, I
encourage this Congress to take on the real issues--to take on
immigration reform, to take on balancing the budget, and, in this
context, to take on ESEA: replace our broken education law No Child
Left Behind with a bipartisan bill that we can be proud of and that
will endure for the next decade; replace the Higher Education Act with
a bipartisan bill that actually makes substantive progress around
reducing the cost of college.
I want to thank Ranking Member Miller and Chairman Kline. I encourage
my colleagues to vote against the rule, and I would encourage them to
vote ``yes'' on both of these bipartisan bills.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
We have worked in a bipartisan fashion on this legislation that is
before us today and on some other legislation. Yesterday, the President
signed H.R. 803, which we called the SKILLS Act when it left the House.
I am very proud of that, and the President talked about how happy he
was to sign that bill and how doing things in a bipartisan fashion felt
so good.
But my colleague across the aisle keeps talking about ``the
Congress.'' As he well knows, but sometimes does not present accurately
to the American people, ``the Congress'' consists of two Chambers: the
House of Representatives and the Senate. The House of Representatives,
as evidenced by what we are doing here today, is very serious about
doing our work.
On average, the House is holding 37 hearings every week, fulfilling
our oversight responsibilities. We have passed 321 bills that are
sitting in the Senate and are not being taken up by Senator Reid, who
is responsible for stopping meaningful legislation that will reduce
energy costs and help create jobs in this country.
The record of House Republicans on fiscal issues is second to none.
We have cut discretionary spending every year since taking control of
the House. We have proposed reforms to many of our entitlement
programs. If the gentleman is sincere in his desire for a balanced
budget, I ask him to work with his ranking member on the Budget
Committee to propose such a path. House Republicans have voted to
support a pathway to balance, and Democrats have voted to raise taxes
on hardworking Americans while never reaching balance.
Mr. Speaker, there is much work that needs to be done in this
country, and we are facing lots of challenges. I believe that education
is the most important tool Americans at any age can have. It was a
privilege to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on the
Education Committee to advance legislation that seeks to meet the needs
of today's student population as well as to provide accountability for
hardworking taxpayer dollars invested. I think the record of the
Education and the Workforce Committee is very clear: when our
colleagues across the aisle will work with us, we move legislation.
No legislation is perfect, and that is why I look forward to
continuing to work with my colleagues to address their concerns and
improve this legislation through the amendment process. Additionally, I
look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to find common
ground on advancing higher education reform that will improve the
opportunities and results for students and will provide accountability
for taxpayers.

[[Page H6679]]

However, these bills provide a good foundation to work from, and as a
proud supporter of this legislation, I urge my colleagues to vote in
favor of this rule and the underlying bills.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule as
it does not make in order a bipartisan amendment to H.R. 4984, that I
introduced with my friend Congressman Runyan.
Under the legislation, institutions are required to provide certain
information to borrowers recommending they exhaust their federal loan
opportunities before taking out private loans, that federal loans
typically offer better terms, and that if they do decide to take out a
private loan, an explanation regarding some of the borrower's rights.
Our simple, right-to-know amendment would add to the list of
information required to be made available an explanation of the
differences between private loans and federal loans when it comes to
the death or disability of the borrower. Borrowers would be notified
that the borrower's estate or any cosigner of a private loan may be
obligated to repay the full amount of the loan in the event of the
death or disability of the borrower.
This amendment is based on bipartisan legislation I introduced with
Mr. Runyan, legislation which passed by a voice vote in the House a few
years ago. The Bryski family--who live in Mr. Runyan's district in
South Jersey--fought for six years to discharge a private student loan
they cosigned for their son Christopher, a college student who suffered
a traumatic brain injury during his third year at Rutgers University
and passed away after spending two years in a coma. Upon Christopher's
death, his family was told by the bank that they would have to take
over the loan and begin making payments on the $50,000 owed.
No family ever expects to lose a child. However, should the
unexpected happen during college, it is a terrible fact today that
families not only struggle with the loss of their loved one, but are
also burdened as they find out they now have the obligation to pay the
student's outstanding private loans. In this circumstance, federal
loans are forgiven, but private lenders often still require families to
pay back loans on behalf of their children. Understandably, the
unexpected costs are difficult to absorb, and families are not mentally
prepared for these various circumstances.
While no one can prepare for or anticipate the death of a loved one,
especially a child entering college, requiring this information to be
made available will ensure families can make the most appropriate
financial decisions about how they finance higher education. This bill
does not add a dime to the deficit, and we are not seeking to change
lending rules or requiring banks to discharge debt. We simply want loan
cosigners to understand what they could be responsible for.
It is a disappointment that the Majority would rather keep parents in
the dark, and would rather allow private banks and some of their most
heartless practices remain in the shadows than consider this simple
amendment that would simply ensure that students and their families are
warned about this possibility.
I urge opposition to the rule.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Polis is as follows:

An Amendment to H. Res. 677 offered by Mr. Polis of Colorado

At the end of the resolution, add the following new
sections:
Sec. 3. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution the
Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare
the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on
the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R.
4582) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide
for the refinancing of certain Federal student loans, and for
other purposes. All points of order against consideration of
the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the
bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided among and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Education and the Workforce and the chair and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
After general debate the bill shall be considered for
amendment under the five-minute rule. All points of order
against provisions in the bill are waived. At the conclusion
of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee
shall rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question
shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments
thereto to final passage without intervening motion except
one motion to recommit with or without instructions. If the
Committee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come to
no resolution on the bill, then on the next legislative day
the House shall, immediately after the third daily order of
business under clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the
Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the bill.
Sec. 4. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the
consideration of H.R. 4582.
____

The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous
question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote.
A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote
against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow
the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a
vote about what the House should be debating.
Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of
Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the
previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or
control the consideration of the subject before the House
being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous
question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the
subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling
of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the
House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes
the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to
offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the
majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated
the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to
a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to
recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said:
``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman
from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to
yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first
recognition.''
The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous
question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an
immediate vote on adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no
substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.''
But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the
Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in
the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition,
page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous
question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally
not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member
controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of
offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by
voting down the previous question on the rule . . . . When
the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of
the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to
ordering the previous question. That Member, because he then
controls the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or
yield for the purpose of amendment.''
In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of
Representatives, the subchapter titled ``Amending Special
Rules'' states: ``a refusal to order the previous question on
such a rule [a special rule reported from the Committee on
Rules] opens the resolution to amendment and further
debate.'' (Chapter 21, section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues:
``Upon rejection of the motion for the previous question on a
resolution reported from the Committee on Rules, control
shifts to the Member leading the opposition to the previous
question, who may offer a proper amendment or motion and who
controls the time for debate thereon.''
Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does
have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only
available tools for those who oppose the Republican
majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the
opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

____________________