[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 109-116]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   ESTABLISHING FIXED INTEREST RATES FOR STUDENT AND PARENT BORROWERS

  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on 
Rules, I call up House Resolution 334 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 334

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (S. 1762) 
     to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to establish fixed 
     interest rates for student and parent borrowers, to extend 
     current law with respect to special allowances for lenders, 
     and for other purposes. The bill shall be considered as read 
     for amendment. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening 
     motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill equally 
     divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce; and 
     (2) one motion to commit.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). The gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Pryce) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I 
yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Slaughter), 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.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 334 makes in order the bill S. 1762 
under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate to be equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Education and the Workforce. Finally, the rule 
provides for one motion to commit.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 1762 amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to 
establish fixed interest rates for student and parent borrowers and 
extends current law with respect to allowances for lenders. To put it 
simply, this legislation will allow for the continued availability of 
affordable student loans for students and their families by addressing 
a long-standing problem in the Federal student loan program about how 
interest rates are calculated. It will simplify loan terms, reduce 
confusion, and lock in low rates for the borrower. At the same time, it 
will provide stability for lenders, helping to avoid disruption in loan 
availability.
  Mr. Speaker, more than 9 million United States students today need 
student loans to help pay for college, and the education of our 
Nation's children is a major concern of most Americans, and it is the 
top priority for our President. While we all know that more money is 
not the single answer to improving the education of our children, 
student loan affordability and access should never become the barrier 
to a college education. It is important to pass this bill today so we 
can lock in these historically low interest rates.
  Students attending the Ohio State University, which is located in my 
district, will benefit just like the millions of others pursuing that 
dream of a higher education all across our country. S. 1762 recognizes 
that investing in our children and providing them the opportunity to 
invest in themselves would prepare them and our country for the 
challenges of tomorrow and stays true to the spirit that ``no child be 
left behind.''
  I would like to take a moment to congratulate the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Boehner), my colleague and good friend and the chairman of the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce, for his hard work and 
commitment to improving the educational opportunities for all American 
students. I would also like to commend the gentleman from California 
(Mr. George Miller), the ranking member of the committee, for his work 
and support of this bipartisan legislation. Finally, let me 
congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the chairman

[[Page 110]]

of the Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness, for his hard work 
and leadership on this very important legislation.
  This bipartisan, bicameral legislation has the support of all the 
parties involved, including the lenders and the student associations 
alike, and it has the support of a majority of this body as it garnered 
257 votes the last time we considered it.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule, and I encourage a 
``yes'' vote on S. 1762.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio for 
yielding me this customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 1762 is a noncontroversial measure designed to ensure 
the continued availability of student loans for students and their 
families. The bill before us today passed the Senate by unanimous 
consent in December and enjoys strong support in the Chamber from both 
sides of the aisle.
  Student loans are critical for a majority of American families 
working to ensure a quality education for their children. With the cost 
of a college education skyrocketing, the need for student loans applies 
to all segments of society. Congress has a duty to ensure that as this 
country weathers a recession, a quality education does not take a hit 
in the process.
  The legislation addresses a long-standing problem in the Federal 
student loan program as to how student loan interest rates are to be 
calculated. The problem first came to light several years ago when it 
was clear that a provision within the Higher Education Act would 
dramatically alter how interest rates would be determined. The interest 
rate formula set to take effect back in 1998 would have forced many of 
the lenders now participating in the Federal Family Education Loan 
Program to reduce or eliminate their participation.
  At the time, Congress worked diligently to craft a solution to a 
problem that virtually everyone agreed would be an unintended result of 
previous legislation. The compromise resulted in the lowest interest 
rates in the Stafford loan program's history. Service was uninterrupted 
to students and their families, and student loan borrowers are now 
paying the historically low interest rate of 5.99 percent in repayment.
  Unfortunately, the compromise reached in 1998 was not made permanent 
when enacted and is scheduled to expire in 2003, and that is why 
today's bill is so important. S. 1762 will extend the current interest 
rate formula set to expire in July of 2003 and lock in the lower 
borrower rates.
  The bill also continues the current formula for determining interest 
rates made by student and parent borrowers before July 1, 2006. Loans 
disbursed on or after July 1, 2006 would be 6.8 percent for student 
borrowers and 7.9 for parents' loans. An average student who borrows 
nearly $17,000 will save over $400. Moreover, student interest rates 
will remain constant for the life of the loan rather than changing each 
year based on a complicated formula.
  I would also note for my colleagues that the measure has been 
endorsed by the United States Student Association, the American Council 
on Education, Sallie Mae, and the Consumer Bankers Association. I urge 
everyone to support this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time 
as he may consume to my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McKeon), a classmate of mine and the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this 
time.
  I rise in strong support of the rule for S. 1762, this very important 
legislation to ensure the availability of higher education financing to 
the students embarking on a very important time in their lives.
  This closed rule is necessary to ensure that this bill is passed 
without amendment so as to allow the White House to sign the 
legislation into law without delay. I do not believe there is a better 
way to serve the students of this Nation than to assure a stable source 
of higher education funding for those who need it most: low and middle-
income students. This legislation provides for the uninterrupted 
continuation of the Federal Family Education Loan Program, known as 
FFELP, and provides certainty of interest rates for all borrowers in 
later years.
  I urge my colleagues to support this closed rule in an effort to 
allow swift action on this bill. Our colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle have been involved in each stage of development of this 
legislation, and while we believe we had a commitment to this 
legislation prior to the end of our last session, unfortunately, due to 
unrelated circumstances, the bill failed to pass on the suspension 
calendar.
  The efforts of our colleagues to take down the bill previously now 
forces us to bring it up again and avoid additional politics in an 
effort to do what is right for students and parents, as well as student 
loan providers, who have been vital partners in the Federal Family 
Education Loan Program for more than 35 years.
  It is my hope that we can pass this rule and move immediately to the 
legislation at hand and pass it overwhelmingly. Let us show the 
students of this country that we put their needs above all else and 
ensure the availability of low cost student loans for them to embark on 
the road to achieving their goals of higher education. Vote ``yes'' on 
this rule and ``yes'' on S. 1762.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time 
as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the 
chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Pryce), my friend and colleague, for yielding me this time.
  I would suggest to the House that today we have a rule before us that 
will provide for a fair and open debate on a bill that we did in fact 
consider last month. Unfortunately, it was brought up under suspension 
and, due to some circumstances that had nothing to do with this bill, 
did not receive the requisite number of votes.
  But I do believe that fixing the student loan interest rate problem 
will provide continued availability of affordable student loans for our 
students. Today some 9 million students take advantage of our student 
loan program, the highest number ever, and they are paying the lowest 
interest rates they have ever paid in the history of the program.

                              {time}  1030

  What we want to do today is to pass the underlying bill that will, in 
fact, continue to have low, affordable rates available to ensure that 
more of our students can achieve their goals of the American dream by 
pursuing a postsecondary education.
  Mr. Speaker, I think the rule that we have before us is fair and 
reasonable. We ought to pass this rule and then pass this bill.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a noncontroversial rule that will allow us to 
pass very important legislation to continue the availability of 
affordable student loans, lock in these low rates, avoid possible long-
term disruptions in access to financing, and provide educational 
opportunities for all our young people.
  Let us give our children the opportunity to invest in themselves, and 
more importantly, to invest in this country's future. I urge my 
colleagues to support this fair rule and this bipartisan bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.

[[Page 111]]

  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 334, I call up 
the Senate bill (S. 1762) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to 
establish fixed interest rates for student and parent borrowers, to 
extend current law with respect to special allowances for lenders, and 
for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the 
House.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The text of S. 1762 is as follows:

                                S. 1762

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

     SECTION 1. INTEREST RATE PROVISIONS.

       (a) FFEL Fixed Interest Rates.--
       (1) Amendment.--Section 427A of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1077a) is amended--
       (A) by redesignating subsections (l) and (m) as subsections 
     (m) and (n), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting after subsection (k) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(l) Interest Rates for New Loans on or After July 1, 
     2006.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (h), with 
     respect to any loan made, insured, or guaranteed under this 
     part (other than a loan made pursuant to section 428B or 
     428C) for which the first disbursement is made on or after 
     July 1, 2006, the applicable rate of interest shall be 6.8 
     percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
       ``(2) PLUS loans.--Notwithstanding subsection (h), with 
     respect to any loan under section 428B for which the first 
     disbursement is made on or after July 1, 2006, the applicable 
     rate of interest shall be 7.9 percent on the unpaid principal 
     balance of the loan.
       ``(3) Consolidation loans.--With respect to any 
     consolidation loan under section 428C for which the 
     application is received by an eligible lender on or after 
     July 1, 2006, the applicable rate of interest shall be at an 
     annual rate on the unpaid principal balance of the loan that 
     is equal to the lesser of--
       ``(A) the weighted average of the interest rates on the 
     loans consolidated, rounded to the nearest higher one-eighth 
     of 1 percent; or
       ``(B) 8.25 percent.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 428C(c)(1)(A) of such 
     Act (20 U.S.C. 1078-3(c)(1)(A)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(1) Interest rate.--(A) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (B) 
     and (C), with respect to any loan made under this section for 
     which the application is received by an eligible lender--
       ``(i) on or after October 1, 1998, and before July 1, 2006, 
     the applicable interest rate shall be determined under 
     section 427A(k)(4); or
       ``(ii) on or after July 1, 2006, the applicable interest 
     rate shall be determined under section 427A(l)(3).''.
       (b) Direct Loans Fixed Interest Rates.--
       (1) Technical correction.--Paragraph (6) of section 455(b) 
     of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(b)), as 
     redesignated by section 8301(c)(1) of the Transportation 
     Equity Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 105-178; 112 
     Stat. 498) is redesignated as paragraph (9) and is 
     transferred to follow paragraph (7) of section 455(b) of the 
     Higher Education Act of 1965.
       (2) Amendments.--Section 455(b) of the Higher Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(b)) is amended--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8); and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(7) Interest rate provision for new loans on or after 
     july 1, 2006.--
       ``(A) Rates for fdsl and fdusl.--Notwithstanding the 
     preceding paragraphs of this subsection, for Federal Direct 
     Stafford Loans and Federal Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loans 
     for which the first disbursement is made on or after July 1, 
     2006, the applicable rate of interest shall be 6.8 percent on 
     the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
       ``(B) PLUS loans.--Notwithstanding the preceding paragraphs 
     of this subsection, with respect to any Federal Direct PLUS 
     loan for which the first disbursement is made on or after 
     July 1, 2006, the applicable rate of interest shall be 7.9 
     percent on the unpaid principal balance of the loan.
       ``(C) Consolidation loans.--Notwithstanding the preceding 
     paragraphs of this subsection, any Federal Direct 
     Consolidation loan for which the application is received on 
     or after July 1, 2006, shall bear interest at an annual rate 
     on the unpaid principal balance of the loan that is equal to 
     the lesser of--
       ``(i) the weighted average of the interest rates on the 
     loans consolidated, rounded to the nearest higher one-eighth 
     of one percent; or
       ``(ii) 8.25 percent.''.
       (c) Extension of Current Interest Rate Provisions for Three 
     Years.--Sections 427A(k) and 455(b)(6) of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1077a(k), 1087e(b)(6)) are 
     each amended--
       (1) by striking ``2003'' in the heading and inserting 
     ``2006''; and
       (2) by striking ``July 1, 2003,'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``July 1, 2006,''.

     SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL ALLOWANCE PROVISION.

       Section 438(b)(2)(I) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1087-1(b)(2)(I)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``, and before july 1, 2003'' in the 
     heading;
       (2) by striking ``and before July 1, 2003,'' each place it 
     appears, other than in clauses (ii) and (v);
       (3) by striking clause (ii) and inserting the following:
       ``(ii) In school and grace period.--In the case of any 
     loan--

       ``(I) for which the first disbursement is made on or after 
     January 1, 2000, and before July 1, 2006, and for which the 
     applicable rate of interest is described in section 
     427A(k)(2); or
       ``(II) for which the first disbursement is made on or after 
     July 1, 2006, and for which the applicable rate of interest 
     is described in section 427A(l)(1), but only with respect to 
     (aa) periods prior to the beginning of the repayment period 
     of the loan; or (bb) during the periods in which principal 
     need not be paid (whether or not such principal is in fact 
     paid) by reason of a provision described in section 
     427(a)(2)(C) or 428(b)(1)(M);

     clause (i)(III) of this subparagraph shall be applied by 
     substituting `1.74 percent' for `2.34 percent'.'';
       (4) in clause (iii), by inserting ``or (l)(2)'' after 
     ``427A(k)(3)'';
       (5) in clause (iv), by inserting ``or (l)(3)'' after 
     ``427A(k)(4)'';
       (6) in clause (v)--
       (A) in the heading, by inserting ``before july 1, 2006'' 
     after ``plus loans''; and
       (B) by striking ``July 1, 2003,'' and inserting ``July 1, 
     2006,'';
       (7) in clause (vi)--
       (A) by inserting ``or (l)(3)'' after ``427A(k)(4)'' the 
     first place it appears; and
       (B) by inserting ``or (l)(3), whichever is applicable'' 
     after ``427A(k)(4)'' the second place it appears; and
       (8) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(vii) Limitation on special allowances for plus loans on 
     or after july 1, 2006.--In the case of PLUS loans made under 
     section 428B and first disbursed on or after July 1, 2006, 
     for which the interest rate is determined under section 
     427A(l)(2), a special allowance shall not be paid for such 
     loan during any 12-month period beginning on July 1 and 
     ending on June 30 unless--

       ``(I) the average of the bond equivalent rates of the 
     quotes of the 3-month commercial paper (financial), as 
     published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
     System in Publication H-15 (or its successor), for the last 
     calendar week ending on or before such July 1; plus
       ``(II) 2.64 percent,

     exceeds 9.0 percent.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). Pursuant to House Resolution 
334, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. George Miller) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).


                             General Leave

  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous matter on S. 1762.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 1762. The legislation 
addresses a long-standing problem in the Federal student loan program 
as to how student loan interest rates are to be calculated. It provides 
for the continued availability of student loan funds to students and 
their families by correcting an unworkable interest rate and special 
allowance rate formula scheduled to take effect in 2003.
  The problem first came to light several years ago when it was clear 
that a provision within the Higher Education Act of 1965 would 
dramatically alter how interest rates would be determined. The formula 
set to take effect back in 1998 would have forced many of the lenders 
now participating in the Federal Family Education Loan Program to 
reduce or eliminate their participation.
  In 1998, the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) were able to craft a bipartisan, but 
temporary, solution to this program that virtually everyone agreed that 
if it was not corrected would create serious harm to students and their 
families

[[Page 112]]

by creating an access program in the student loan programs.
  The compromise reached through the hard work of the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) 
resulted in what are now the lowest interest rates in the Stafford loan 
program's history. Service continues to students and their families, 
and student loan borrowers are now paying the historically low interest 
rate of 5.99 percent in repayment.
  Unfortunately, the compromise reached in 1998 was not made permanent 
when enacted, and is scheduled to expire in 2003; and the unworkable 
index from prior legislation is set to go back into effect. The problem 
must be corrected to ensure the availability of capital within the 
student loan program.
  Lenders in the Federal Family Education Loan Program will not be able 
to finance student loans under the index set to take effect in 2003. By 
taking action and passing S. 1762 today, we can ensure the continued 
availability of student loan funds to students nationwide.
  The legislation also extends the current special allowance formula 
for student loan providers, allowing them to continue uninterrupted 
service to the Nation's students and their families.
  This legislation enjoys the support of both Republicans and Democrats 
in both Houses of Congress and the administration. It is the result of 
compromise and collaboration with all involved and is supported by 
student loan providers, financial aid officers, and student 
associations.
  The reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1965 is fast 
approaching, and we will have a lot to focus upon. The student loan 
interest rate issue consumed virtually all of the reauthorization 
process in 1998 and took away time and resources that could have been 
used more productively. I think it is important that we fix the 
interest rate problem now so that when we do the reauthorization, we 
can concentrate on the many issues that will confront us that are of 
significant interest to the higher education community and our 
students.
  The bottom line is this: we have reached an agreement across the 
board that this interest rate issue needs to be resolved. Our 
colleagues in the other body have done their part. It is now time for 
us to do our part. Let us ensure that the availability of student loans 
is there for students all across our great Nation.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill today, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support S. 1762, that reduces interest 
rates on student loans. I would like to begin by thanking four Members 
who worked particularly hard on this bill in a bipartisan spirit: the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McKeon), the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Mrs. Mink), and the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  I appreciate the leadership of Senator Johnson in the other body. 
Members of our committee worked very hard to bring this legislation 
about and to put it in a manner in which all Members of Congress could 
support it.
  As we know, this legislation came up late last year, on December 20; 
and I opposed the bill at that time. I did so because of the Republican 
leadership's refusal to schedule a bipartisan bill authored by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), despite the support of the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) and the New York delegation.
  That bill, H.R. 3163 would forgive the education loans to surviving 
spouses of police officers, firefighters, and other fire and rescue 
personnel of the September 11 terrorist attack. I remain disappointed 
in the Republicans' failure to schedule this bill. However, my concern 
is with the Republicans' use of the suspension calendar and not this 
bill. I urge my colleagues to support the bill today.
  Today's legislation will ensure continued availability of student 
loans. The bank subsidies on student loans will sunset in 2003, 
jeopardizing the loans' profitability and therefore the availability. 
S. 1762 ensures the stability of this program by making the lender 
subsidies permanent. S. 1762 cuts the interest rates for students, and 
this was the major part of the debate last year.
  Last year some proposed raising the interest rates on the students to 
ensure these bank profits. All the Members on the Democratic side of 
the Committee on Education and the Workforce signed a letter advocating 
a stable loan program without higher rates to the students. Through the 
hard work of the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), and others, that is what this legislation 
does.
  In addition to extending lender subsidies, it cuts interest rates to 
students, fixing the rates at 6.8 percent beginning in 2006, and will 
save the average student about $400. Too often in the Congress, the 
needs of the average people come last in line. My colleagues should be 
commended for assuring that this legislation meets the needs of 
students and their families.
  There is broad support in the student loan industry. It has been 
endorsed by the U.S. Students Association, the American Council on 
Education, and student loan industry groups, including Sallie Mae, the 
Consumer Bankers Association. I urge all of my colleagues to support 
it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McKeon), who is also the chairman of the Subcommittee 
on 21st Century Competitiveness.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time, and also for the great leadership that he has provided in the 
education area during this Congress. I also thank the gentleman from 
California (Mr. George Miller) for working with us. They have provided 
strong leadership in passing H.R. 1, and that is very important to the 
youth of our country.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1762. This legislation, 
which has been supported by both Democrats and Republicans and was 
passed expeditiously by our colleagues in the other body, will ensure 
the availability of higher education financing to the students 
embarking on a very important time in their lives. There is no better 
way to serve the students of this Nation than to ensure a stable source 
of higher education funding for those who need it.
  This legislation quite simply provides for the uninterrupted 
continuation of the Federal Family Education Loan Program, known as 
FFELP, and will provide certainty of interest rates for all borrowers 
in later years.
  Many of my colleagues will remember that the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Kildee) and I worked diligently in 1998 to correct the problem in 
the Higher Education Act of 1965 dealing with student loan interest 
rate calculations. The success of our bipartisan efforts is evidenced 
by the current student loan interest rates. Students in repayment now 
pay 5.99 percent, the lowest Stafford rates in the program's history. 
This low rate and other benefits provided by student loan providers 
allows students to partake in a low-cost means of financing their 
education while maintaining a strong and stable student loan program.
  The agreement we reached in 1998 is now running up against the clock. 
The interest rate formula resulting in new low rates while maintaining 
the viability of the FFELP is set to expire in the year 2003. If that 
occurs, students and parents will be unable to obtain these low-cost 
loans from lenders across the country, and lenders that make these low-
cost loans will not be able to finance student loans under the formula 
set to take effect.
  While we intended the fix to be permanent in 1998, we were unable to 
institute it for more than 5 years. By taking this action now, there 
will be no interruption in the availability of student loan funds, and 
Congress will be able to concentrate fully on many issues that will 
confront us during the

[[Page 113]]

next reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1965, including 
grant aid eligibility, distance education, access, and the cost of 
higher education, to name a few.
  This legislation also takes one additional step for students and 
their families: it provides assurances as to what interest rates will 
be in the future. While S. 1762 would extend the current viable 
interest rate formula until 2006, it would then provide for both 
student loans and parent loans to be at a fixed interest rate. 
Supporters of this provision feel this will allow families to plan 
future expenses knowing clearly what the interest rates on their 
education loans will be. We can make the continued availability of low-
cost student loans one less thing students pursuing their dream of 
higher education need to worry about.
  I would like to thank especially Kathleen Smith and George Conant 
from the committee staff, and Bob Cochran and James Bergeron from my 
staff; and as I mentioned earlier, the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman 
Boehner); the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. George 
Miller); the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Mrs. Mink); and the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for all of the excellent help on this bill.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he 
may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), a member of 
the committee.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this well-reasoned, well-
thought-out legislation. I want to thank and commend the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the gentlewoman from 
Hawaii (Mrs. Mink), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for 
their leadership in bringing this to the floor today.
  On December 20, I was among those who opposed this legislation. I did 
not do so on its merits. I did so because of the principle of defending 
the rights of the minority in this Chamber.
  The legislation the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) 
made reference to previously that was introduced by our colleague, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), would have provided student 
loan forgiveness for the surviving spouses of heroes, police officers 
and firefighters and other heroes involved in the atrocities of 
September 11.
  That legislation is supported by the Republican leadership and the 
Democratic leadership of the committee, and I believe it is supported 
by every member of our committee; and it should have been brought to 
the floor under the suspension calendar of the House. It should have 
been brought immediately to the floor of the House. I hope, Mr. 
Speaker, that the leadership reconsiders its decision to deny that 
opportunity and brings it forward.
  Having said that, we now turn our attention to the legislation before 
us. It is worthy in three very important respects.
  First of all, it will mean lower interest rates for students and 
their families right now. It will make it more affordable to borrow 
money to go to school, and that is a good thing.
  Second, it will provide stability in the student loan system. We have 
an excellent system today that provides for competition between the 
direct student loan program and the bank-based private sector student 
loan program. As a result of this, students and their families and 
institutions get to choose the best offer, the best price, the best 
quality for themselves.
  Without this change, which assures the financial structure of the 
private side of the program, the private side of the program would be 
very much in jeopardy, and it is conceivable that private lenders would 
leave the system. That would be very disadvantageous to students around 
the country.
  Finally, the legislation is worthy because, as the chairman of the 
subcommittee said just a few minutes ago, it provides some certainty 
for families planning for paying for higher education by locking in 
today's relatively low interest rates well into the future, and making 
them permanent.
  For all of these reasons, I would urge both Republican and Democratic 
Members to follow suit, follow the example of the other body, and 
approve this legislation.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Isakson), a member of the committee.
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for the introduction 
and for yielding time to me, but in particular for his hard work on the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce on bringing this bill to the 
floor; and I particularly commend the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McKeon), with whom I have worked for some time now, in seeing this bill 
actually come to the floor and be passed.
  I really appreciate the acknowledgment of the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews) that the inaction or lack of action in December 
really had nothing to do with the merits of this legislation.

                              {time}  1045

  What has to do with the merits of this legislation is ensuring 
predictable student loans at competitive and favorable rates for 
American students that otherwise might not or would not get the student 
opportunity to receive a higher education.
  Secondly, it is important, as the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Andrews) has pointed out, that we provide the ability to lock in rates 
and have a fixed rate repayment so those families that are struggling 
to meet the demands of paying back their cost and ensuring that their 
child gets a higher education have a predictable, consistent flow and 
rate.
  Third, it is important to understand that any time you put indexes 
and formulas into the law to affect the rates or the guarantees on any 
program there are going to be periodic needs for adjustment, and now is 
the periodic need for that adjustment.
  There are some, in fact, I was questioned on a radio talk show last 
night as I talked about this bill, who questioned whether or not we 
ought to be in this business. Well, let me address that for one second 
because the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) on their hard work on higher education, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and I know the same 
thing, in America the most important thing we can have is to see to it 
that bright minds who can achieve have the opportunity to further their 
education, who can then contribute to its fullest to the United States 
of America.
  Second, as is the case in most Federal guarantee programs, it 
actually produces revenue for the United States as long as we are sure 
we will do a good underwriting job and a good collection job is done.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today and endorse this 
legislation. I thank both sides of the aisle for their hard work on it 
and say to the students of America who are looking forward to a college 
education that otherwise would not be within their reach because of 
finances that we are willing to provide the underpinning and the 
opportunity for a consistent flow of favorable rate loans for students 
to further their dreams and reach their goals.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as 
she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), a 
member of the committee.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate 
myself with the words that were spoken here.
  There was never any contention about this bill. I certainly supported 
it in committee and I support it today and I urge all of my colleagues 
to support it.
  I think in this time of need of this country that we have to do 
everything possible to make sure that our young people and also our 
parents know they have the ability to send their children to college 
for higher learning. If anything, it is national security to make sure 
we have the brightest minds, especially in math and science, to 
continue the work that we need.

[[Page 114]]

  What happened on December 20, unfortunately, I think was a 
misunderstanding. I know my chairman has promised to work with me to 
again bring up hopefully the bill on the Surviving Spouse Loan Act, 
which is important certainly to many of the victims on September 11, 
and I am hoping that we will continue to work on that. I wish we were 
able to work on it that night to have a clarification on it.
  So, again I stand here in great support of this bill. It had nothing 
to do with the merits, the confusion that happened that morning, at 5 
o'clock in the morning, I believe it was. But unfortunately we probably 
should not do things like that at 5 o'clock. As a nurse I can state 
one's mind is not functioning very well.
  With that, I do urge my colleagues. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Boehner) and I have worked well together on our committee. We have a 
lot of work to do on IDEA coming this year and I am willing to work 
with the gentleman on that. Again, I hope his promises of helping me to 
get this bill to the floor will continue. I am more than willing to 
work together. I urge all of my colleagues to certainly support this 
amendment.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for 
yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1762, a bill that will ensure 
the long-term availability of higher education loans for students and 
their families.
  Our Nation's higher education loan system under the Federal Family 
Education Loan Program is an example of government at its best. By 
working in partnership with students, parents, college universities and 
private sector loan providers, the Federal Government has made the 
dream of college a reality for more than 50 million Americans since 
1965.
  Right now there are families with children heading off to college 
next fall who are talking about not only where their children will 
attend school, but how they will pay for it. For high school students 
and their families currently facing these daunting questions, today's 
action will resolve half of that equation and leave them with the more 
pleasant task of determining which college or university is right for 
them, not whether they will have the means to afford it.
  By continuing the current formula for setting student loan interest 
rates, we will avoid the volatility that certainly would have set in 
had the current system been allowed to lapse. This will ensure 
stability in the Federal Family Education Loan Program and guarantee 
the loan system that serves 80 percent of America's schools and 
millions of our students.
  For the past 35 years education loans have been critical in enabling 
America's families to afford the rising cost of college tuition. By 
passing this legislation today we will maintain our national investment 
in well-educated, well-trained young people who can compete with 
workers anywhere in the world. In short, this legislation is good for 
students, families, schools, taxpayers and the economy.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out to all of my 
colleagues that this bill is supported by both loan providers and 
student advocacy groups. In fact, the State PIRG's Higher Education 
Project predicts that the typical student borrower will realize a 
savings of $680 over the life of the loan.
  I want to commend the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the ranking 
member, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) for their leadership in assuring 
continued availability of education loans for future generations of 
students. This is important legislation for our Nation, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he 
may consume to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon), a strong 
supporter of this legislation.
  Mr. GORDON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  More importantly, I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Boehner), the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for the leadership they have exhibited in 
bringing this bill before us.
  Passage of this legislation provides a final resolution to a long 
needed fix within the Higher Education Act related to the way interest 
rates for student loans are set, making college more affordable for 
millions of students across the country.
  S. 1762 has been developed and agreed upon by a bipartisan process 
and the other body has passed this legislation in December by unanimous 
consent. Every major higher education association, including groups 
representing students, schools and lenders, support this legislation. 
If we do not take this action now, we run the risk of having a system 
under which two-thirds of students loans are made revert back to a 
troublesome formula that threatened the viability of several lenders 
back in 1998.
  Mr. Speaker, most students, especially those from low- and middle-
income families, have enough of a financial challenge getting through 
school. They either have to work their way through school or family 
members have to take a second job to help defray the cost of higher 
education. The burden of high or fluctuating interest rates should not 
be another distraction. We have the means to resolve this issue once 
and for all, and I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this important 
legislation.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he 
may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski).
  Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to join my colleagues today 
first of all to congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) 
and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for a great compromise 
entered into several years ago, in 1998, that provided for a new 
formulation of how we would finance student loans.
  Basically what we are doing is making it attractive for lenders to 
provide funds for students and parents to get guaranteed low rates and 
to make the funds sound for at least the next 6 years to bring about a 
better use of higher education funding in the United States. I commend 
both the ranking member and the chairman of the committee and, as I 
said, the respective chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee.
  This is a technical problem that probably is not of the highest order 
of understanding of people, but it is the type of fix and in the 
tradition of trying to be bipartisan in an issue in education and in 
the country today where both sides of the aisle can come together and 
support this.
  I urge all of my fellow Members on the Democratic side to join the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and myself and others and 
my Republican colleagues on the other side and show a resounding show 
of support to fix the student loan program to provide long-term funding 
into the future at reasonable rates that parents, students and lenders 
can rely upon.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to 
support the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me say a comment as we close. This really is 
important legislation. The costs associated with this bill are covered 
in the budget resolution that was agreed to earlier last year, and by 
doing this we will continue to have a strong availability of affordable 
student loans for our students. With that, I ask my colleagues to vote 
for this bill.
  Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1762, which ensures 
that continued viability of low-interest loans for college students.
  When the Budget Committee drafted the fiscal year 2002 budget 
resolution last spring, we sought to avert a potential crisis in the 
Federal Student Loan Program. The train we saw coming down the track 
was a change in the interest rate structure set to take place in July 
2003.

[[Page 115]]

  That change would repeal the current structure, which supports $38 
billion in new, federally subsidized, student loans each year for needy 
college students. It would replace it with a controversial new formula 
that education experts warned would be potentially disruptive to the 
loan program.
  The scheduled change could jeopardize the availability of funds for 
student loans because it would tie interest rates to long-term 
treasuries. The loan program has thrived for years on interest rates 
that correspond to short-term Treasury rates.
  The scheduled change was created under the assumption that, by 2003, 
all student loans would be issued by the Federal Government. But 70 
percent of the loans are now issued by private lenders. We have to 
adjust for that reality.
  Fixing the interest rate problem will be expensive. It will cost 
money because the baseline already assumes the scheduled change in 
interest rates.
  It is for this reason the FY 2002 budget resolution included a 
reserve fund that allowed the committee to adjust the appropriate 
levels in the budget resolution to offset the ``cost'' of repealing the 
change in interest rates.
  I would observe, however, that this bill does not fully comply with 
the terms of the budget resolution. First, the bill slightly exceeds 
the size of the reserve fund in the resolution. This is mostly because 
the Congressional Budget Office re-estimated the cost of repealing the 
scheduled interest rate change after Congress had adopted the budget 
resolution.
  Secondly, the budge resolution stipulated that the reserve could only 
be tapped if the surplus exceeded specified levels. Unfortunately, the 
surplus has not materialized as a result of the events of September 11 
and the on-going recession.
  Nevertheless, I will support this bill because it was accommodated in 
the budget resolution. Further, neither the Budget nor Education 
Committees could have foreseen CBO's rescoring of the bill nor the loss 
of the surplus due to the recent terrorist attacks.
  Finally, I would like to thank Mr. Boehner and Mr. McKeon for their 
efforts to ensure the continued viability of the student loan programs, 
which will issue more than 9 million new loans this year.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 1762 which 
seeks to ensure the availability of low-cost student loans to millions 
of students across the country. Passage of this legislation will ensure 
a strong and stable Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) and 
give students and their families piece of mind that this important, and 
largest, student aid program will be there to serve them and I commend 
my colleague from California, Mr. McKeon for helping bring this measure 
to the floor today.
  The current student loan interest rate formula has provided for the 
lowest Stafford Loan interest rates in history, currently 5.99 percent, 
but is unfortunately set to expire on July 1, 2003. When the current 
formula expires, an unworkable formula will take over. Lenders have 
warned us that they will be unable to finance student loans under the 
new formula, putting a 35-year history of serving students and parents 
in serious jeopardy. Without lenders providing student loans, students 
and their families will be left out in the cold, with few options left 
to pay for higher education. The temporary fix enacted in 1998 was 
intended to be permanent, but the funds were not available to make that 
happen. S. 1762 will make the fix permanent.
  S. 1762 assures loan availability and stability in the public/private 
partnership by continuing the current structure for payments made to 
banks and other student loan lenders ensuring the private sector's 
continued participation in the student loan program. Present and future 
college students need to know that the Federal Family Education Loan 
Program will be available to them as they pursue higher education 
opportunities. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to fully support this 
measure.
  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be on the floor 
today for consideration of the bill S. 1762. This bipartisan 
legislation keeps the interest rates on college student loans at their 
current and unprecedented low levels.
  Had I been present, I would have voted in favor of this bill. This is 
solid legislation that provides for the continued availability of 
affordable student loans. The extension of current low interest rates 
is necessary to ensure that students can continue to obtain the 
financial assistance needed to meet postsecondary education goals. The 
current student loan interest rate formula, set to expire on July 1, 
2003, provides students and their families with an affordable way to 
pay for an education that might otherwise not be possible. A variety of 
educational and financial institutions, including the Kentucky Higher 
Education Assistance Authority, strongly support S. 1762. Stabilizing 
interest rates now will secure educational opportunities for the 
future. I am pleased by the broad support this legislation received.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this 
legislation to amend the Higher Education Act. This bill will help 
millions of students and their families across the nation deal with the 
rising cost of higher education. Now more than ever, it is important 
that our citizens can afford the costs of a college education.
  The bill we are about to vote on will help that cause by setting a 
low, fixed, interest rate of 6.8 percent on student loans. Right now, 
we are looking at the lowest loan interest rates in history. This low 
rate, 5.99 percent, is due to the current interest rate formula that 
will expire next year. We must act now to ensure a low interest rate 
for our students. Student loans have repayment periods that range 
anywhere from 10 years to 25 years. If we can do anything to protect 
our students from facing the possibility of sinking deeper in debt 
because of higher interest rates, we should do that now. Our students 
and their families deserve as much.
  This bipartisan bicameral legislation is a great way to start off the 
year and help our students across the country. It passed the Senate 
unanimously, and now I urge my colleagues to support this measure and 
vote ``yes.''
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). All time for debate has 
expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 334, the Senate bill is considered as 
read for amendment and the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the third reading of the Senate bill.
  The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, and was read the 
third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the Senate 
bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 372, 
nays 3, not voting 59, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 4]

                               YEAS--372

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Bass
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Isakson

[[Page 116]]


     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, George
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Morella
     Myrick
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watson (CA)
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (PA)
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--3

     Flake
     Moran (KS)
     Paul

                             NOT VOTING--59

     Barton
     Becerra
     Berman
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Boucher
     Burton
     Clay
     Collins
     Cubin
     Davis (IL)
     Doyle
     Everett
     Fletcher
     Frank
     Gallegly
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hooley
     Hyde
     Jones (NC)
     Kind (WI)
     Largent
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Luther
     Manzullo
     McCarthy (MO)
     Miller, Gary
     Mink
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Obey
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Riley
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Sessions
     Sherwood
     Solis
     Thomas
     Thurman
     Traficant
     Vitter
     Waters
     Watkins (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1122

  So the Senate bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 4 on S. 1762 I was 
unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 4, S. 1762, to 
establish fixed interest rates for student and parent borrowers, I was 
unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, today, January 24, due to family 
considerations, I unfortunately was not present for a rollcall vote.
  Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 4, S. 
1762, to establish fixed interest rates for student and parent 
borrowers.
  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained for rollcall No. 
4, S. 1762, a bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to 
establish fixed interest rates for student and parent borrowers, to 
extend current law with respect to special allowances for lenders, and 
for other purposes. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea.''

                          ____________________