[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 151 (Tuesday, September 20, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H7993-H7998]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                JOINT CONSOLIDATION LOAN SEPARATION ACT

  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 
1361, I call up the bill (S. 1098) to amend the Higher Education Act of 
1965 to authorize borrowers to separate joint consolidation loans and 
ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1361, the bill 
is considered read.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                S. 1098

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Joint Consolidation Loan 
     Separation Act''.

     SEC. 2. SEPARATING JOINT CONSOLIDATION LOANS.

       (a) In General.--Section 455(g) of the Higher Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(g)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``A borrower'' and inserting the following:
       ``(1) In general.--A borrower''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Separating joint consolidation loans.--
       ``(A) In general.--
       ``(i) Authorization.--A married couple, or 2 individuals 
     who were previously a married couple, and who received a 
     joint consolidation loan as such married couple under 
     subparagraph (C) of section 428C(a)(3) (as such subparagraph 
     was in effect on June 30, 2006), may apply to the Secretary, 
     in accordance with subparagraph (C) of this paragraph, for 
     each individual borrower in the married couple (or previously 
     married couple) to receive a separate Federal Direct 
     Consolidation Loan under this part.
       ``(ii) Eligibility for borrowers in default.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a married 
     couple, or 2 individuals who were previously a married 
     couple, who are in default on a joint consolidation loan may 
     be eligible to receive a separate Federal Direct 
     Consolidation Loan under this part in accordance with this 
     paragraph.
       ``(B) Secretarial requirements.--Notwithstanding section 
     428C(a)(3)(A) or any other provision of law, for each 
     individual borrower who applies under subparagraph (A), the 
     Secretary shall--
       ``(i) make a separate Federal Direct Consolidation Loan 
     under this part that--

       ``(I) shall be for an amount equal to the product of--

       ``(aa) the unpaid principal and accrued unpaid interest of 
     the joint consolidation loan (as of the date that is the day 
     before such separate consolidation loan is made) and any 
     outstanding charges and fees with respect to such loan; and

[[Page H7994]]

       ``(bb) the percentage of the joint consolidation loan 
     attributable to the loans of the individual borrower for whom 
     such separate consolidation loan is being made, as 
     determined--
       ``(AA) on the basis of the loan obligations of such 
     borrower with respect to such joint consolidation loan (as of 
     the date such joint consolidation loan was made); or
       ``(BB) in the case in which both borrowers request, on the 
     basis of proportions outlined in a divorce decree, court 
     order, or settlement agreement; and

       ``(II) has the same rate of interest as the joint 
     consolidation loan (as of the date that is the day before 
     such separate consolidation loan is made); and

       ``(ii) in a timely manner, notify each individual borrower 
     that the joint consolidation loan had been repaid and of the 
     terms and conditions of their new loans.
       ``(C) Application for separate direct consolidation loan.--
       ``(i) Joint application.--Except as provided in clause 
     (ii), to receive separate consolidation loans under this 
     part, both individual borrowers in a married couple (or 
     previously married couple) shall jointly apply under 
     subparagraph (A).
       ``(ii) Separate application.--An individual borrower in a 
     married couple (or previously married couple) may apply for a 
     separate consolidation loan under subparagraph (A) separately 
     and without regard to whether or when the other individual 
     borrower in the married couple (or previously married couple) 
     applies under subparagraph (A), in a case in which--

       ``(I) the individual borrower certifies to the Secretary 
     that such borrower--

       ``(aa) has experienced an act of domestic violence (as 
     defined in section 40002 of the Violence Against Women Act of 
     1994 (34 U.S.C. 12291) from the other individual borrower;
       ``(bb) has experienced economic abuse (as defined in 
     section 40002 of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (34 
     U.S.C. 12291) from the other individual borrower; or
       ``(cc) is unable to reasonably reach or access the loan 
     information of the other individual borrower; or

       ``(II) the Secretary determines that authorizing each 
     individual borrower to apply separately under subparagraph 
     (A) would be in the best fiscal interests of the Federal 
     Government.

       ``(iii) Remaining obligation from separate application.--In 
     the case of an individual borrower who receives a separate 
     consolidation loan due to the circumstances described in 
     clause (ii), the other non-applying individual borrower shall 
     become solely liable for the remaining balance of the joint 
     consolidation loan.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 428C(a)(3)(B)(i)(V) of 
     the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1078-
     3(3)(B)(i)(V)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of item (bb);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of item (cc) and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(dd) for the purpose of separating a joint consolidation 
     loan into 2 separate Federal Direct Consolidation Loans under 
     section 455(g)(2).''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour, 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Education and Labor or their respective designees.
  The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and insert extraneous material on S. 1098.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the bipartisan, 
bicameral Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, led in the Senate by 
my colleague from Virginia, Senator Mark Warner, and led in the House 
by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).
  Student loans should provide a pathway to opportunity, not saddle 
borrowers with a lifetime of burdensome debt, especially if the loans 
don't even belong to them.
  Regrettably, many borrowers' financial well-being has been made worse 
by student loans jointly held by their spouse or former spouse.
  The Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act would provide much-needed 
relief for individuals who previously consolidated their student loans 
with their spouse. Although Congress eliminated the joint consolidation 
loan program in 2006, it did not provide a way for borrowers to sever 
existing loans, even in the event of domestic violence, domestic abuse, 
or unresponsiveness from a former spouse after a divorce.
  As a result, according to the most recent data from the Department of 
Education, there are at least 13,500 borrowers with federally held 
joint consolidation loans.
  The Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act would allow borrowers to 
submit an application to the Department of Education to split the joint 
consolidation loan into two separate Federal direct loans. The two new 
Federal direct loans would be split proportionally based on the 
original unpaid principal and have the same interest rates as the joint 
consolidation loan, ensuring borrowers are not saddled with a higher 
interest rate.
  Importantly, the bill provides a pathway for an individual to apply 
to separate a loan from a spouse, a current spouse or former spouse, 
including in the event of an absentee or unresponsive spouse, for an 
act of violence or economic abuse.
  Mr. Speaker, we can all agree that no borrower should be forced to 
pay a debt that isn't theirs, especially the debt of an abusive former 
spouse.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and 
I thank my colleague for yielding the time.
  While I fully support the underlying intent of S. 1098, the Joint 
Consolidation Loan Separation Act, I have concerns about the bill as 
drafted. The purpose of this bill is to protect student loan borrowers 
who consolidated their loans with a spouse but now seek to reverse this 
process. Yet, as written, this bill undermines that purpose.
  I am concerned this bill will hurt the very borrowers we are trying 
to help. We never want to see a spouse, especially one that is a victim 
of domestic violence, forced to be financially tied to his or her 
abuser. We want to give these borrowers a way out. However, we also 
recognize that it is not only the abused spouse who may be applying for 
these new consolidations.
  Under the Senate-passed language, when a borrower files for a new 
consolidated loan, he or she could potentially leave his or her spouse 
with the remaining balance. We must be cognizant of the fact that a 
borrower could use this new legislation as a weapon. This is why we 
need safeguards in place to ensure that both parties are not subject to 
potential abuse through the separation process and not just the one 
filing for a new consolidation.
  Additionally, the Department of Education has stated that it will 
take 12 to 18 months to implement this bill. Given the urgency of the 
situation that many borrowers are in, this kind of delay is 
unacceptable. We need to provide these borrowers with a quicker way out 
of their joint consolidation loan. Yet, Democrats rejected the 
Republicans' solution that will give these borrowers an almost 
immediate separation without unnecessary paperwork that will bog down 
the process.
  Further, I am concerned that this bill could be used by the Secretary 
of Education to stage an even broader takeover of student loans. It 
would be simpler and more straightforward to allow these loans, once 
separated, to remain with their current holder, but instead, this 
legislation attempts to drive as many of these loans as possible into 
the government-run Direct Loan program.
  We have ample evidence to believe that the Biden Department of 
Education will take the inch given in this legislation and use it to go 
a mile. The administration's illegal expansion of the income-driven 
repayment program and Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, let 
alone Biden's student loan bailout, are evidence of that.
  For example, the vague language included in this bill, namely, the 
authority for the Secretary of Education to allow for new consolidation 
loans if it is in ``the fiscal interest of the Federal Government.'' 
The Department of Education has not been able to provide clarity on 
what this phrase means or how it applies to this bill, but it has been 
used previously by this administration to force billions of dollars' 
worth of loans made by private lenders

[[Page H7995]]

onto the government's books. Moreover, the President's $1 trillion 
transfer of wealth from hardworking taxpayers to college 
graduates clearly illustrates this administration had no intention of 
protecting ``the fiscal interests of the Federal Government.''

  We must not create any loopholes or back doors for the Biden 
administration to exploit. Transferring massive amounts of student loan 
debt to taxpayers is harming our economy and setting a horrible 
precedent for future borrowers, not to mention failing to solve the 
underlying problems in postsecondary education.
  Because of these issues, Republicans have a solution that will allow 
student loan servicers to separate joint consolidation loans almost 
immediately, instead of having to wait over a year to receive relief.
  Our solution is a commonsense and practical way to accomplish the 
same goal as this legislation but more quickly and efficiently.
  Republicans are willing to work across the aisle to ensure borrowers 
are taken care of, but unfortunately, Democrats are more focused on 
opening more avenues for the administration to expand its radical loan 
bailout.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the House sponsor of the 
legislation.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise in 
support of S. 1098, the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act.
  I am the author of the House version of this bill and have introduced 
it every Congress since the 115th, always with a Republican cosponsor.
  I would like to start my remarks today by thanking the Members, past 
and present, who have helped bring us to the floor today.
  I thank our former colleague Bradley Byrne of Alabama for his 
cosponsorship of the first iteration of this bill. I thank 
Congresswoman Haley Stevens and other current bipartisan cosponsors; 
Senators Mark Warner, Marco Rubio, and John Cornyn, who recently 
steered this bill to passage in the Senate; and my colleague from North 
Carolina, Senator Richard Burr, who expedited the review of this bill 
by his committee.
  This bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent on June 15 of this 
year.
  I also thank my good friend Chairman  Bobby Scott and his staff. They 
have vetted this bill and worked over this bill very carefully. He is 
an outstanding leader of the committee, and he has been a longstanding 
supporter of this bill. He included it, in fact, in various versions of 
the Higher Education Act.
  I also thank the staff, entrepreneurial staff, who picked up on this 
problem from casework years ago and devised a legislative solution. 
That would be Kate Roetzer and Nora Blalock of my staff initially, 
Janssen White and Elizabeth Adkins more recently, and other personal 
and committee staff, House and Senate.
  Thanks, too, to the advocates, people affected by this problem, who 
have come to our offices and our town meetings and relentlessly 
advocated for relief. A number of these advocates are our guests in the 
gallery today.
  The Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, or JCL for short, is 
simple in its intent but significant in its impact on thousands of 
student loan borrowers who have waited for relief for far too long.
  From 1993 to 2006, the U.S. Department of Education issued joint 
consolidation loans to married couples where both borrowers agreed at 
the time to be jointly liable for repayment. As you might expect, this 
proved problematic if that couple ever needed or wanted to separate the 
loans.
  Congress wisely eliminated this program in 2006 but with one critical 
oversight: Congress did not provide a means of severing the existing 
loans, even in the event of domestic abuse, economic abuse, or an 
unresponsive partner. There was, in other words, no grandfather clause.
  As a result, there are borrowers nationwide who remain financially 
liable for their absconded or abusive or uncommunicative spouse's 
portion of their consolidated debt with no legal options for relief.
  The bill before us would allow such borrowers to submit an 
application to the Department of Education to split the joint 
consolidated loan into two separate Federal direct loans. The joint 
loan remainder would be split proportionately based on the percentage 
that each borrower originally brought into the loan.
  It was an unfortunate mistake not to grandfather in the severing of 
these loans with the 2006 cancellation of the program, so this bill is 
a long overdue, commonsense correction. Congress does occasionally make 
mistakes; in case we hadn't noticed.
  Let me just illustrate to you what the solution means for the lives 
of borrowers.
  I first became aware of this issue in 2014, 8 years ago, through 
constituent casework. My constituent consolidated his $25,000 loan with 
his ex-wife's $75,000 loan. After their divorce, the Department 
continued to collect on the combined loan from both parties, even 
though my constituent had paid off his portion of the loan. That is 
just one of the many examples that cover the spectrum of unpleasant 
situations with this shared debt.
  Let's assume that one partner attended community college and the 
other an expensive private school, and their loan amounts are vastly 
different. When they consolidated their loans, they both agreed to be 
jointly liable for repayment. But say the partner who attended private 
school became unresponsive and stopped paying into the loan. That left 
the partner who attended community college saddled with their total 
debt, along with the partner's private school education cost.

                              {time}  1445

  We have also heard horror stories of couples who have survived 
abusive relationships but continue to remain tied to their partners 
through the loan. Former partners have exerted financial abuse by 
refusing to copay with their exes. In other instances, individuals are 
unable to get in contact with the copartner of their loan and are 
similarly left to shoulder the debt all by themselves.
  These borrowers have seen their wages garnished and their credit 
scores ruined to the point where they cannot assist their own children 
in taking care of Federal student loans. This has become a generational 
impact.
  These loan holders are often in punishing situations with no hope in 
sight for action to fix this mistake unless we pass the bill before us 
today.
  This bill has been thoroughly vetted by the Department of Education, 
the House Committee on Education and Labor, and numerous checkpoints in 
the Senate. It passed by unanimous consent in the Senate a few short 
months ago. We have made accommodations all along the way, including 
Republican changes that I did not prefer, for the sake of getting the 
bill to the floor in both Chambers. With tomorrow's vote, it will go 
directly to the President's desk.
  This is a bipartisan, bicameral piece of legislation. I believe it is 
the end product of a fair process that has withstood the rigors of 
legislative scrutiny. As far as legislative impact goes, this one is 
simple but profound in its impact on borrowers.
  The Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act presents a rare 
opportunity for Congress to right a wrong, to correct an omission in 
its own legislative process. I urge that we do so. The bill offers a 
fair and equitable relief to borrowers who have suffered great 
hardship, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Good).
  Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 1098, 
which expands the Secretary of Education's already illegitimate, 
unconstitutional authority, so-called, to transfer student loan debt 
from those who borrowed it to those who did not.
  How egregious, once again, that we would try to force taxpayers who 
did not go to college, who worked their way through college without 
incurring debt, or who paid off their student loans to now have to 
carry the debt for those making up to $250,000 a year, from a family 
standpoint.
  This is an effort to double the number of student loans where the 
debt will be transferred to hardworking taxpayers. This bill allows new 
authority

[[Page H7996]]

for the Secretary of Education to allow for new loans if it is in the 
``fiscal interests of the Federal Government.''
  Now, that is an interesting concept. Since when does this majority 
consider the fiscal impact of their decisions?
  There is no limit to how many illegals they will allow to invade our 
country through the southern border, and there is no limit, seemingly, 
to how much money they will spend. The answer to every supposed problem 
is to spend more money, irrespective of the fiscal impact.
  Instead of considering the fiscal impact on the Federal Government, 
by the way, which I suspect we will not do since the Federal Government 
doesn't have any money, since the Federal Government is in debt for $31 
trillion, which is $90,000 per citizen, how about if we consider the 
fiscal impact on the taxpayers who are on the hook for that $31 
trillion and will be on the hook for this new spending that is being 
advocated for today?
  The truth is this bill, this legislation, would add billions more to 
the already terrible decisions we have made fiscally in this Congress. 
The majority's response to the $31 trillion national debt that we have 
already referenced most recently is to pass their inflation increase 
bill. That added $800 billion more in spending, half of it for green 
raw deal spending, a couple hundred billion dollars for IRS agents, 
because I am sure you hear all across your district, like I do, that 
the only thing we need is more IRS agents.
  Then, our other response, in addition to the inflation increase act, 
is to the student loan transfer fiasco, transferring debt from those 
who borrowed it to those who did not. Today, we will add billions more 
to that $600 billion conservative estimate on what the cost is of the 
student loan transfer scheme.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this bill.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, prior to yielding time, I yield 
myself 1 minute just to remind those on the other side of the aisle, 
who have lectured this side of the aisle on fiscal responsibility, that 
every Democratic Presidential administration since Kennedy left office 
with a better deficit situation than they inherited--every one, without 
exception. And every Republican since Nixon, every administration left 
office with a worse deficit situation than they inherited, without 
exception. President Trump was well on his way to fulfilling that trend 
before the pandemic.
  But hypocrisy is not much of an issue. I just wanted to remind people 
who is fiscally responsible and who isn't.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. 
Stevens), a distinguished member of the Committee on Education and 
Labor and an original cosponsor of this legislation.
  Ms. STEVENS. Mr. Speaker, in that vein, some of us are here to 
pontificate, and others of us are here to solve problems.

  I rise today for those who have been the victim of this oversight. 
From the period of 1993 to 2006, Americans filed for the consolidation 
of student loans, not realizing that they may fall prey to an 
unfortunate situation: domestic abuse; economic abuse; an unresponsive 
partner; or divorce, which plagues 50 percent of this population.
  Under the leadership of my friend and colleague, Congressman Price, 
we have a solution. We have a bill, the Joint Consolidation Loan 
Separation Act, which is bipartisan and which we should pass to help 
people.
  To those who have been victims--and I consider you victims--we offer 
our extension of empathy, but we also offer our extension of a 
solution. We have a good program here to allow you to reengage with the 
Department of Education to make sure that you have fairness with your 
loan.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to come together to pass this bill.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Murphy).
  Mr. MURPHY of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I want 
to say how deeply I appreciate Mr. Price's hard work over the last 
couple of years on S. 1098. I thank him very much for his efforts on 
this key and very bipartisan issue.
  It is clear that there is bipartisan support that victims of spousal 
abuse should be able to sever these consolidation loans without penalty 
or delay. I don't think that is the question. The question here is the 
change in the calculus because of what President Biden has done.
  While I support the intention of this bill to separate these loans, 
President Biden's unconstitutional, only-able-to-be-done-because-of-
his-abuse-of-power student loan giveaway has drastically changed the 
context in which we consider this bill. The President, in his actions, 
has undermined what was a clear bipartisan effort.
  S. 1098 gives the administration the authority and creates a pathway 
which could be used for loan forgiveness, again taking money from 
people who didn't benefit from a college education and making those 
individuals pay for it.
  Once these loans are separated into the Direct Loan Program, these 
loans will be eligible for Biden's near-trillion-dollar student loan 
giveaway. Republicans made a good-faith effort to amend this 
legislation to protect taxpayers, but Democrats refused to close this 
loan forgiveness loophole.
  Our Republican solution, the Simplified Joint Consolidation 
Separation Act, will allow borrowers to separate their loans in a more 
timely manner to expedite financial freedom while protecting taxpayers 
by focusing on the administration's authority to directly aid those 
most in need.
  This targeted, commonsense legislation should garner immediate 
support from both sides of the aisle and will actually correct the 
issue that we all want solved.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Tonko). Members are reminded to refrain 
from engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, would the Speaker advise how much 
time is remaining on both sides.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Virginia has 19 minutes 
remaining. The gentlewoman from North Carolina has 20 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the full 
committee, Mr. Scott, for continuing to find ways to collaborate with 
his members and others to ensure that we respond to the crux of 
opportunity in America, and that is education.
  I am so grateful to be able to stand and support S. 1098 and to take 
this brief moment to thank my fellow alum,   David Price, for being 
persistent in this legislation and serving the American people over the 
years that he has done. I had a chance to get a second bite of the 
apple. David was here and then came back. I have enjoyed every moment 
of his commitment to opportunities for Americans over the years, 
including housing and transportation and homeland security, and I 
certainly want to say to him that the American people are better for 
his service to this Nation. I thank him so very much.
  I am grateful to finally be able to say, Chairman Scott, to a 
constituent who I saw over the weekend that called the number of the 
bill--most times, constituents don't know bill numbers. They said: ``I 
need you to support S. 1098.'' Obviously, this is something so many of 
us have been looking to because we have heard this from our 
constituents.
  I am very grateful that this legislation now allows a married couple 
who has previously consolidated their Federal student loans, because we 
were allowed to do that--many people thought that was a good thing to 
do, to submit a joint application to the Department of Education to 
sever their loan, allowing each former spouse their proportional 
responsibility. Each former spouse would still be obligated for a share 
of the loan, but their share of responsibility would be benchmarked to 
the proportion of the debt that they brought into the consolidated 
loan. Without loan severance, if a spouse refused to pay their share, 
the other spouse remains responsible for full payment.

  This is important legislation as it relates to divorce and domestic 
violence or economic abuse. Bearing the risk of the full responsibility 
for a consolidated loan after divorce can dramatically restrain a 
spouse from moving on with their life, from supporting their children, 
from getting a house, from feeling safe.

[[Page H7997]]

  The Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act also addresses the 
especially volatile situation of former relationships in which an 
individual was subjected to domestic or, as I said, economic abuse.
  As a sponsor of the Violence Against Women Act that became law in 
March of last year, I am especially concerned about women who have 
experienced physical, mental, sexual, emotional, even psychological 
abuse at the hands of a spouse or partner. S. 1098 allows them to 
separate from toxic relationships, get away from the economic abuse, 
and retain or maintain their credit so that they can go forward. This 
can also apply to a male who may be suffering from the same situation.
  Two married borrowers of Federal student loans could combine their 
debt into a single loan, but we can also come back now to ensure that 
they can separate it. This is an important step forward.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to 
the gentlewoman.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, we enthusiastically add this to the 
component of making sure, under the Violence Against Women Act, that 
there is an expanded understanding of what happens when one spouse 
abuses another or the idea of economic abuse.

                              {time}  1500

  Just as an example, when one spouse is not being timely, is not being 
responsive, for whatever reason is not able to be found, then the 
credit of the remaining spouse being dutiful is completely, if I might 
use the term, mutilated.
  I am eager to ensure that this bill is passed. I certainly 
acknowledge the Senator from the State of Texas, Senator Cornyn. We 
have worked together on other matters.
  I will let everybody know this bill is bipartisan, and I will let 
everyone know that what we will be doing is ensuring that people can 
restore their lives. They can stand up again and be able to pay their 
debt.
  As I finish, I am stunned by people who don't want to see us move 
forward for people to pay their debt. They can pay their debt. Let us 
all support S. 1098.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1098, the Joint Consolidation 
Loan Separation Act allowing a jointly-held loan debt to be separated.
  This legislation would allow a married couple, who had previously 
consolidation their federal student loan debts, to submit a joint 
application to the Department of Education to sever their loan, 
allotting to each former spouse their proportional responsibility.
  While each former spouse would still be obligated for a share of the 
loan, their share of responsibility would be benchmarked to the 
proportion of debt that they brought into the consolidated loan. 
Without loan severance, if a spouse refuses to pay their share of the 
loan, the other spouse remains responsible for full payment.
  This is very important legislation because it is a key to 
independence following a divorce. Without being able to sever their 
loan obligation after divorce, people are forced to continue 
interacting with their former spouse.
  Bearing the risk of full responsibility for a consolidated loan after 
divorce can dramatically restrain a spouse from moving on with their 
life, both financially and emotionally, as they are forced to maintain 
communication with someone from whom they no longer want to be closely 
associated.
  The Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act also addresses the 
especially volatile situation of former relationships in which an 
individual was subjected to domestic or economic abuse from the other 
individual.
  As the sponsor of the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act 
that became law in March of this year, I am especially concerned about 
women who have experienced physical, mental, sexual, emotional, or 
psychological abuse at the hands of a spouse or partner.
  Thus, it is especially important that S. 1098 make it easy for women 
who have suffered from abuse to sever their loans, to help them sever 
their toxic relationships.
  Indeed, S. 1098 allows one borrower to submit a separate application 
in the event that the individual has experienced domestic or economic 
abuse from the other individual borrower or is unable to reasonably 
access the loan information of the other borrower.
  In the case of this occurring, the other non-applying individual 
borrower shall become solely liable for the remaining balance of the 
joint consolidation loan.
  Joint consolidation loans were first created for the good of 
Americans to combat growing default rates.
  Two married borrowers of federal student loans could combine their 
debt into a single loan.
  While the legislation was intended to proactively accommodate these 
life situations, joint consolidation forms came with no guidance from 
the Department of Education for cases of domestic or economic abuse.
  A divorce decree could not remove one spouse from the debt, nor could 
have any other agreement as both people were now legally responsible 
for the combined debt.
  If an ex-spouse refused to pay their share of the monthly payment, 
the other spouse would have to make the entire payment themselves.
  If a former couple wanted to make their student loan payments under a 
payment plan, both spouses would need to pay the loan under the same 
plan and provide their financial information.
  If one of them failed to do so, they would both be denied access to 
the payment plan.
  Because of all these loopholes, Congress eliminated access to joint 
consolidation loan applications in 2006.
  However, it did not provide a way to separate responsibility for 
existing loans, even in cases of domestic violence, economic abuse, or 
an unresponsive partner.
  With the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, we can now provide 
a way out for those facing domestic violence or economic abuse, as 
victims in this position face challenges beyond their own control.
  As reported by the CDC, about 1 in 4 women and nearly 1 in 10 men 
have experienced physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner 
during their lifetime.
  According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, 
between 94 and 99 percent of domestic violence survivors have also 
experienced economic abuse, which includes coerced debt and withholding 
access to money.
  There are currently 776 borrowers with spousal consolidation loans, 
according to the Student Borrower Protection Center.
  It is our responsibility to do right for these borrowers who fell 
victim to the consequences of previous legislation.
  As the sponsor of H.R. 1620, the Violence Against Women Act 
Reauthorization Act, I proudly support S. 1098's efforts to provide 
options for victims of violence, especially for women who are at a 
significantly higher risk.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, my amendment to S. 1098 would establish a more efficient 
process for separating joint consolidation loans to ensure timely 
relief for borrowers, protect victims of abuse seeking to sever their 
financial entanglement with their abuser, and protect taxpayers by 
ensuring that the Secretary's authority is narrowly tailored to help 
those in need.
  It allows borrowers to separate their loans immediately rather than 
having to apply for a new loan in the Direct Loan Program, a process 
that can take as long as 18 months to implement.
  Moreover, it ensures that those who are victims of economic or 
domestic abuse can split their loans without opening up avenues for 
their abuser to game the system and inflict further harm on those we 
are trying to help.
  This is a commonsense fix to a bill that all of us agree is well-
intended but falls short of ensuring adequate safeguards for borrowers.
  S. 1098 also fails to protect against the abuse of executive 
authority, something this administration has already proven it will 
happily do.
  If we adopt the motion to commit, we will instruct the Committee on 
Education and Labor to consider my amendment to S. 1098 to establish a 
more efficient process for separating joint consolidation loans to 
ensure timely relief for borrowers that need it.
  I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the 
Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to commit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from North Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass the amendment so 
we can provide timely relief to the borrowers who need it, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Scott, as well, for the 
outstanding job that he has done.
  Mr. Price, I don't know what more you can do. I really don't. This 
bill is

[[Page H7998]]

bipartisan; it is bicameral; and, by God, we ought to pass it.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to consider the solution 
Republicans have put on the table. Borrowers wanting out of joint 
consolidated loans should have the opportunity to separate, but the 
method we use to get this done is important.
  S. 1098, the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, will take the 
Department 12 to 18 months to implement, far too long for some 
borrowers who are in urgent need of help. This legislation could also 
backfire on the very borrowers we are all working to help.
  Additionally, this bill's sloppy and vague language could pave the 
way for even more Federal power grabs over the student loan system. 
Given what we have seen from this administration, we cannot open any 
doors to further student loan debt schemes.
  Bottom line, S. 1098 delays support for borrowers who need assistance 
immediately, cedes more control to the Education Secretary, and fails 
to protect the borrowers and taxpayers.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, while the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act does 
not solve the student loan debt crisis, it takes another sensible step 
to help borrowers separate with loans that do not belong to them. This 
legislation also comes at a critical time when many borrowers seek 
relief under President Biden's recently announced loan cancellation 
program.
  Unfortunately, not all borrowers with joint consolidation loans are 
currently eligible for relief, even if they meet all other criteria.
  Simply put, by advancing the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, 
we are providing borrowers with additional avenues of loan relief, 
ensuring survivors of domestic or economic abuse are not responsible 
for their spouse's or former spouse's debt.
  Again, I thank Senator Warner of Virginia and the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Price) for their leadership on this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the legislation, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1361, the 
previous question is ordered on the bill.
  The question is on the third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be read a third time, and was read the third 
time.


                            Motion to Commit

  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to commit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to commit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Ms. Foxx moves to commit the bill (S. 1098) to the 
     Committee on Education and Labor.

  The material previously referred to by Ms. Foxx is as follows:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Joint Consolidation Loan 
     Separation Act''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF GUIDANCE TO SEPARATE JOINT 
                   CONSOLIDATION LOANS.

       Section 428C of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1078-3) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(3)(B)(i)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subclause (IV);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of subclause (V) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(VI) separation of a joint consolidation loan into 
     individual consolidation loans in accordance with subsection 
     (g) shall not be considered receipt of a consolidation loan 
     for purposes of this clause, and an individual's status as an 
     eligible borrower shall not change solely as a result of such 
     a separation.''; and

       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Secretary Guidance on Joint Consolidation Loans.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Authorization.--Notwithstanding section 421(d), a 
     married couple, or two individuals who were previously 
     married and received a joint consolidation loan under 
     subsection (a)(3)(C) (as such subsection was in effect on 
     June 30, 2006), may jointly request the Secretary or holder, 
     in accordance with paragraph (2), to separate the existing 
     joint consolidation loan into two individual consolidation 
     loans.
       ``(B) Eligibility for borrowers in default.--A married 
     couple, or two individuals who were previously a married 
     couple, who received a joint consolidation loan described in 
     subparagraph (A) and are in default on such joint 
     consolidation loan may both be eligible for separation of 
     such joint consolidation loan into two individual 
     consolidation loans in accordance with this subsection.
       ``(C) Eligibility for individual requests.--
       ``(i) Circumstances allowing for separate application.--An 
     individual who is one of the parties who received a joint 
     consolidation loan described in subparagraph (A) may, 
     separately and without regard to whether or when the other 
     individual borrower who received such joint consolidation 
     loan applies under subparagraph (A), request separation of 
     such joint consolidation loan into two individual 
     consolidation loans in accordance with this subsection in a 
     case in which the requesting individual borrower certifies to 
     the Secretary that such borrower--

       ``(I) has experienced an act of domestic violence from the 
     other individual borrower;
       ``(II) has experienced an act of economic abuse from the 
     other individual borrower; or
       ``(III) is subject to a divorce decree, court order, or 
     settlement agreement requiring the separation of joint loans 
     and obligations.

       ``(ii) Obligation from separate application.--In the case 
     of a joint consolidation loan that is separated upon request 
     of an individual borrower due to one or more circumstances 
     described in clause (i), the other non-applying individual 
     borrower shall be liable for the outstanding balance of the 
     individual consolidation loan of such borrower in the same 
     manner as if both borrowers of the joint consolidation loan 
     had applied for such separation.
       ``(2) Secretarial and holder requirements.--Notwithstanding 
     subsection (a)(3)(A) or any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary or holder may separate the joint consolidation loan 
     for eligible borrowers who meet the eligibility requirements 
     specified in paragraph (1). The two separate individual 
     consolidation loans shall--
       ``(A) be for an amount equal to the product of--
       ``(i) the unpaid principal and accrued unpaid interest of 
     the joint consolidation loan (as of the date that is the day 
     before separation of the joint consolidation loan) and any 
     outstanding charges and fees with respect to such loan; and
       ``(i) the percentage of the joint consolidation loan 
     attributable to the loans of the individual borrower for whom 
     such separate consolidation loan is being separated, as 
     determined--

       ``(I) on the basis of the loan obligations of such borrower 
     with respect to such joint consolidation loan (as of the date 
     such joint consolidation loan was made); or
       ``(II) in the case in which both borrowers request, on the 
     basis of proportions requested by the borrowers, outlined in 
     a divorce decree, court order, or settlement agreement;

       ``(B) have the same rate of interest as the joint 
     consolidation loan (as of the date that is the day before 
     separation of the joint consolidation loan); and
       ``(C) not be considered new loans, shall be deemed to have 
     been made on the date such joint consolidation loan was made, 
     and shall have the same terms and conditions as other 
     consolidation loans made under this part on such date.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the 
previous question is ordered on the motion to commit.
  The question is on the motion to commit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question are postponed.

                          ____________________