[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23911-23914]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1015
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2669, COLLEGE 
                     COST REDUCTION AND ACCESS ACT

  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 637 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 637

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 2669) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to 
     section 601 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 2008. All points of order against the conference 
     report and against its consideration are waived. The 
     conference report shall be considered as read.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Ohio is recognized for 
1 hour.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.


                             General Leave

  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and insert extraneous materials into the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 637 provides for consideration of the conference 
report to accompany H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction and Access 
Act. The rule waives all points of order against the conference report 
and its consideration and considers the conference report as read.
  Mr. Speaker, I am honored to rise today in support of this rule and 
this much-needed underlying conference report, the College Cost 
Reduction Act, which will help give our students a real opportunity to 
go to college and give them the vital tools necessary to enter our 
workforce and build a positive future for themselves and our 
communities. And, Mr. Speaker, at the outset I want to thank 
Representative George Miller, the distinguished chairman of the 
Education and Labor Committee, along with Speaker  Nancy Pelosi, whose 
commitment to our students, our families and our future in this country 
has brought us to this day when we are able to take this great step to 
put college education back within reach of so many hardworking families 
and students. The College Cost Reduction Act addresses one of the most 
pressing issues facing millions of families across this Nation: the 
question of how they will afford to send their children to college.
  Educational opportunity is the backbone of our Nation and everything 
that makes it great. And while access to higher education is more 
critical than ever for younger generations, the cost is rapidly moving 
out of reach for many low- and middle-income families. Tuition at 4-
year public colleges and universities has risen 41 percent after 
inflation since 2001. And the typical American student now graduates 
from college with a $17,500 debt. This problem has developed into 
nothing less than a crisis.
  Sadly, due to the failure of past Congresses, many students have had 
their dreams shattered because they could not afford college tuition. 
Many hardworking parents have had their hearts broken because, despite 
their valiant efforts, they simply could not afford to pay tuition and 
meet other vital family needs. This problem has festered for too long, 
and I have long believed, Mr. Speaker, that those in government must 
work with the people they are called to serve and not against them.
  And that is what this bill does. It is the single largest investment 
in higher education since the GI Bill. It's good for our families. It's 
good for our students. It's good for our country.
  Financial barriers to higher education not only hurt students 
themselves by robbing them of the education and training necessary to 
make a productive and positive impact in our communities; it hurts us 
all. Investing in our students will not only improve their future; it 
will help our economy and our retired workers whom they will support. 
It ensures our national security, continued improvements in health 
outcomes, and will help the United States maintain its role as a leader 
in developing new cutting-edge technologies. By providing students with 
access to higher education, we are bolstering every sector of our 
economy from medical research to manufacturing because we are creating 
the next generation of innovators and leaders. Investing in our younger 
generations will not only help our students and families who are need; 
it strengthens America.
  The promise of the American Dream is the glue that holds our 
communities together. It was educational opportunity that provided me, 
the proud daughter of a working family, to obtain a first-rate 
education and ultimately find my way to the floor of the House of 
Representatives to fight for what is right. By denying the 
opportunities afforded by access to higher education, we deny our 
families their share of the American Dream.
  The College Cost Reduction Act addresses this crisis in a fiscally 
sound and responsible manner. It is funded by cutting unnecessary 
subsidies to private lenders and putting our taxpayer dollars to work 
for the American people. So, Mr. Speaker, this act will not only put 
college back in reach for our families; it does so by cutting almost 
$21 billion in taxpayer subsidies to private lenders and reinvesting 
over $20 billion of the savings in our Nation's students and putting an 
additional $750 million towards reducing our Nation's deficit.
  Specifically, the College Cost Reduction Act will cut the interest 
rates on subsidized student loans in half. The bill invests heavily in 
the much-needed, need-based Pell Grant scholarship program, increasing 
the maximum award by at least $1,090 over the next 5 years and 
expanding eligibility for the grants. By passing this bill, we will 
make a college education possible for hundreds of thousands of 
additional students over the next 5 years.
  Additionally, Mr. Speaker, this legislation also recognizes the value 
of our public servants by providing them with loan forgiveness for 
those who choose to serve in the jobs that make our world turn: 
teachers, firefighters, nurses, law enforcement officers, and 
librarians.
  Further, the College Cost Reduction Act provides upfront tuition 
assistance to qualified undergraduates who commit to teaching in public 
schools in high-poverty communities. This bill invests in the strength 
of our communities and of our country. And the return on our investment 
as a Nation in our students and people will, without question, provide 
an enormous return.
  Mr. Speaker, the crisis of college cost is pervasive, and it is 
getting worse. It is long past the time that Congress

[[Page 23912]]

take action to ensure that a college education is not a privilege 
reserved only for the wealthy.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support our children and our families 
by voting for the rule and the underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, 
the gentlewoman from Ohio, for the time; and I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  This rule that the majority brings forth today, Mr. Speaker, is a 
standard rule for a conference report. But yesterday the minority on 
the Rules Committee voted against this rule because of the 
unsatisfactory manner in which the conference report was put together.
  In his submitted testimony to the Rules Committee yesterday, 
Education and Labor Committee Ranking Member Buck McKeon expressed 
concern with the process the majority used of the conference committee. 
The minority was informed at 9:30 p.m. that the conference committee 
would meet at 11:30 a.m. the following morning. However, the majority 
did not provide the minority with the text of the conference report at 
the time the meeting was announced and even kept the text away from 
Republicans at the meeting itself.
  Republican conferees were, in effect, left in the dark. They had no 
way to know what was in the report. As such, it was impossible for 
members of the minority to propose amendments to the report and thus 
play any meaningful part in the conference.
  Democrats did not even allow Republicans to see the conference report 
at the end of the meeting. Instead, Republicans had to wait until later 
in the evening hours after the conference committee had ended.
  Mr. Speaker, our friends on the other side of the aisle campaigned, 
and they did so repeatedly, on an open, fair, and bipartisan process, 
including a promise to provide members of conference committees with 
texts of conference reports. They also said that they will allow 
members of the conference committee to vote on all amendments.
  During consideration of the rules package for this new Congress, the 
distinguished chairwoman of the Rules Committee said, ``Never again 
will any Member of the Congress have to fight to find out where the 
conference to which he or she has been appointed is meeting.''
  Well, in this instance, Members did not have to fight to find the 
conference committee location, but they certainly did have to fight to 
get the text of the conference report; and even after fighting, they 
did not get to see it. By keeping the text of the conference report 
away from the minority, Democrats were essentially locking out 
Republican Members from the conference committee, which is exactly what 
the Democrats said they would not do.
  So, Mr. Speaker, because of the manner, the way the majority kept the 
text of the conference report from Republicans and thus committed, if 
you will, a process foul, we oppose this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman, the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee from 
California (Mr. George Miller).
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule to make in order 
the conference report on H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction and 
Access Act.
  In this last election, we campaigned very hard on cutting the cost of 
college for students and making college more affordable for students 
and their families who are borrowing money to go to school. And it is 
clear that we intend to do that with the passage of this legislation 
today.
  In the first 10 hours as part of our 6 for '06 agenda, we cut the 
interest rates in half on the subsidized student loans so that those 
low-income families and middle-income families who are struggling to 
meet the debt burden of sending their children to school will have some 
relief in that effort. And over the next 4 years in this conference 
report, we will cut those interest rates from 6.8 percent to 3.4 
percent, which is a savings of the average indebted student upon 
graduation over the life of that loan of some $4,400. Also for the 
lowest-income students, the students most in need, we are increasing 
the Pell Grant up to a level over the next 5 years of $5,400. This is 
in keeping with what the President promised but never did, and this is 
in keeping with our promise that we would again restore the purchasing 
value of the Pell Grant.
  And you can see from this chart, Mr. Speaker, the fact is over the 
last several years, the Pell Grant has been flat-lined in spite of 
promises each and every year that it was going to be increased; and 
this year for the first time Mr. Obey put money in, in the continuing 
resolution in the appropriations bill, and then this bill will continue 
to raise the Pell Grant to $5,400. This is the largest increase, 
certainly, in recent history.
  It is important that these two populations, middle-income students 
and families and low-income students and families, have these resources 
available to them. And the reason it is important is we are now seeing 
increasing reports now estimated at more than a quarter of a million 
students who are fully qualified to go to school every year choose not 
to go to college, to postpone it, or not to go at all because they are 
worried about whether or not they will be able to manage the debt or 
afford the cost of college.

                              {time}  1030

  And it is our job to make sure that no student in America that is 
fully qualified to go to college is refused the opportunity to do so 
because of the cost of college. That has been the policy of this 
country since the GI Bill, and this is the largest investment since the 
GI Bill 50 years ago. But it was a policy of the Eisenhower 
administration, of the Kennedy administration, and essentially every 
administration on a bipartisan basis since then. But we now see college 
costs far outstripping the ability of families to pay for a college 
education, therefore requiring them to borrow money.
  So in this legislation we take $20 billion away from the large 
lenders and other lenders of college loans, excessive subsidies that 
were paid for them, excessive subsidies that were identified in the 
President's legislation, and we recycle those monies to the benefit of 
the students and to their families, and we do so within pay-as-you-go, 
that each and every expenditure in this bill is paid for by the 
recycling of those excessive subsidies that were going to the lending 
institution. And in that way, we're able to deliver real money to these 
families in need in the form of a reduction in interest rates, in the 
form of an increase in the Pell Grants.
  But we also do that so that those people who want to choose the 
profession of a policeman, a nurse, a fireman, a teacher, a special 
educator, a prosecutor, a public defender, that those individuals will 
be allowed to choose those careers and know that they will not have to 
make another choice because of the crushing debt of their college 
education. They, under this legislation, will not be required to pay 
any more than 15 percent of their income in any given year for these 
student loans. And what does that mean? That means they can start a 
career in nursing, in health care, in law enforcement, as a first 
responder, and they know that if they stay in that field for 10 years, 
that loan will be forgiven. That is a major advantage to those 
individuals who are seeking to go into those fields.
  We also want to keep the promise of earlier actions in this Congress 
when we passed the COMPETES Act to have highly qualified teachers in 
math and science go into the classrooms. We're saying to those 
exemplary performers in college that if you'll go into teaching and 
you'll go into the most difficult schools, we will give you $4,000 a 
year up front while you're in school of tuition relief if you will 
agree to do that; 16,000 real dollars to those people because they're 
going to go in and teach in the most difficult schools, and the 
exemplary performers are going to have the skills and the talents to do 
that if they so choose to do it.
  This legislation is the foundation of the cornerstone of our agenda 
on innovation for new discovery of this Nation, the next generation of 
discovery,

[[Page 23913]]

of innovation, of economic growth and jobs here in America. This is the 
most valuable investment we can make. Every economist will tell you 
that the investment in education yields more back to the government, 
more back to the public sector, more back to civil society than any 
other investment we make. And that's what we're doing in this 
legislation. We promised we would do it. We started out in ``6 for 
'06,'' and today, with this conference report, the House and the Senate 
is keeping its promise.
  We've made changes in this legislation that were suggested by Mr. 
McKeon and by the administration. And I am proud to announce that the 
President, in spite of his suggested veto messages or his staff-
suggested veto messages over the last couple of months, the President 
has agreed to sign this legislation.
  I encourage all of my colleagues to join in support of this rule and 
to support the conference report when it comes before us. I hope that 
we will have a good bipartisan vote as they're now having in the Senate 
at this very moment.
  I thank the gentlewoman for her support in this effort and for 
yielding the time.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege 
to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman 
from California, the ranking member of the committee, Mr. McKeon.
  Mr. McKEON. I thank the gentleman for yielding the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule. This rule would 
provide for consideration of fiscally irresponsible legislation that 
would create costly new entitlement programs and misdirect billions of 
aid toward colleges, universities, college graduates and philanthropic 
organizations rather than the low-income students who need the help the 
most.
  My colleagues who were around in the last Congress may remember that 
when we passed a real budget reconciliation bill, the Education and 
Workforce Committee found some $18 billion plus in savings, two-thirds 
of which we directed towards deficit reduction and one-third of which 
we directed towards increased student benefits such as higher loan 
limits, more grant aid for low-income, high-achieving students, and 
loan forgiveness for high-demand teachers. Unfortunately, H.R. 2669, 
the bill that will be before us today, takes us in a drastically 
different direction.
  The rule before us provides for the culmination of months of abuse of 
the budget reconciliation process as a backdoor way to implement 
significant changes to programs best addressed through regular order. 
Not a single committee hearing has been held on this legislation. The 
potential impact of many of its student loan cuts has never been 
weighed, and no one has provided adequate reasons regarding why the new 
entitlement programs and complex student loan auction scheme created 
under the conference report are necessary or fiscally reasonable.
  It eliminates the right of parents to choose their lender and 
replaces consumer choice with a government-run auction system that is 
complex, burdensome and untested. And all of this will be put into 
place in a couple of weeks time. I'm anxious to see how the department 
puts this into place.
  This measure could have been improved by infusing more savings into 
the Pell Grant Program. Pell is a proven success that has helped 
millions of young people attend college. In the time during the last 12 
years that we were in charge, we have increased Pell Grant spending 
double. As the chairman just pointed out, the amount of what he talked 
about, the individual aid to each individual student, has remained 
fairly even, but the amount that we have put in has been increased like 
a billion dollars a year over that period of time because we have a 
million and a half more students that have now been able to take 
advantage of that and use the money for their help in getting their 
chance to achieve the American Dream.
  By creating a bundle of new entitlement programs complete with new 
bureaucracy, rules, and regulations, this conference agreement places 
billions of dollars in new Federal spending on autopilot with no 
accountability to taxpayers whatsoever, completely opposite of what the 
real purpose of reconciliation is for.
  The purpose of reconciliation, requiring an easier passage by only 
requiring 50 votes in the Senate, was set up to reduce mandatory 
spending and to save money on the budget deficit. And this will 
actually increase and go just the opposite direction.
  And finally, let me be perfectly clear: I have absolutely no 
confidence in the Department of Education's ability to implement the 
changes outlined in this conference agreement, particularly with the 
timeline it sets. It gives me no pleasure to point out this obvious 
fact, particularly in a Republican administration, but it's true. And 
sadly, we will be watching this failure play out in the coming months 
and years.
  The rule allows consideration of a conference report that breaks 
promises to students and taxpayers alike. I urge my colleagues to join 
me in opposing it.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this is the single largest 
investment in education since the GI Bill, and we know what the GI Bill 
did for the World War II generation.
  Last month, the American people lost 4,000 jobs under this 
administration, and foreclosures are rising. The middle class needs 
relief. And this bill will cut interest rates in half of subsidized 
student loans over the next 4 years. It will allow borrowers to be able 
to not pay more than 15 percent on their loans.
  In addition, the Pell Grant, something that has helped low income, 
students, and what all of my students ask about every single time I 
visit college campuses, will be raised to $490, and over 5 years more 
than $1,000. And then we will invest in America's most underserved 
communities, Hispanic-serving, Historically Black, Native Americans and 
other institutions in which the bill will invest $510 million to help 
students stay in school among other incentives.
  This legislation helps our students graduate. It encourages public 
service. This bill is worth all of us voting for it. The middle class 
of America needs relief. This is a giant step forward in educating all 
Americans.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from New York, a distinguished member of the Education and 
Labor Committee, Mr. Bishop.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, it is difficult for me to summarize in 1 minute the 
attributes of this first-rate conference report, but let me just say 
this: For a period of time before I came to the Congress, I was the 
senior administrator in a college. I had a very simple rule when I was 
faced with a decision. That rule was: Is the decision I'm about to make 
in the best interest of students, will it help students? And by that 
measure, the answer to this question is an emphatic ``yes.''
  We should be supporting the rule. We should be supporting the 
underlying legislation. This legislation helps students realize their 
dreams, and that's what this Congress should be about. This is about 
student aspiration, and this is about the Congress providing the 
resources to see to it that students can get their slice of the 
American Dream. And by increasing the Pell Grant maximum, by reducing 
the rate that students will have to pay when they borrow, and by 
streamlining the needs analysis system so that students have a more 
realistic measure of their ability to pay, we will increase access, we 
will enhance affordability.
  We should support this rule and support this conference report.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois, a distinguished member of the Education and Labor Committee, 
Mr. Davis.

[[Page 23914]]


  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the 
rule for H.R. 2669, the College Cost Reduction and Access conference 
bill.
  Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to commend the leadership in both 
the House and the Senate for this outstanding legislation. This bill 
recognizes the fact that without investment there is no return. And it 
is, indeed, a strong investment in the future of America.
  There are many components of the bill that are outstanding: loan 
forgiveness for public service, loan forgiveness for individuals who 
teach in high-need institutions, schools. But especially, Mr. Speaker, 
I am pleased to note that this legislation focuses attention on the 
needs of primarily minority-serving institutions like Hispanic-serving 
institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, PBIs, 
predominantly black institutions, and of course Native American and 
Pacific Island institutions.
  I want to commend Mr. Hinojosa, who is the chairman of our 
subcommittee, and urge that this legislation be passed.
  First of all, Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the leadership in both 
the House and the Senate for this outstanding legislation. This bill 
recognizes the fact that without investment, there is no return. And it 
is indeed a strong investment in the future of America. It expands 
access and makes higher education more accessible for all. It increases 
the Pell grant maximum to $4,800 next year and to $5,400 by 2012. It 
cuts interest rates, provides up-front tuition for students who agree 
to teach in high-need public schools, provides loan forgiveness for 
some public employees and, Mr. Speaker, I am especially pleased that it 
recognizes the unique needs of primarily minority serving institutions 
like Hispanic-serving Historically Black Colleges and Universities, 
Native American, Pacific American, Asian American and Predominately 
Black Institutions in which I took a particular interest. Importantly, 
it includes $510 million for these minority-serving institutions and 
$30 million for PBIs specifically.
  Again, Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the leadership in both the 
House for this great work and especially subcommittee Chairman Hinojosa 
for his strong positions on the needs of minority students and 
primarily minority serving institutions.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, we reiterate that 
the process by which this conference report was composed was not fair. 
And it, in effect, violated the promises made by the other side of the 
aisle very recently, very recently made and reiterated. The process was 
profoundly unfair. I stressed that in my previous remarks, and I 
reiterate it now.
  In addition, we've heard from the distinguished ranking member with 
regard to grave concerns by many of those who have been working on this 
issue, such as Mr. McKeon, for many years.
  So for those reasons, Mr. Speaker, we oppose this rule and would urge 
a ``no'' vote on the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, the Congress has an obligation to address 
the needs of the American people, and to work with them to address the 
pressing problems that they face.
  Today, we take a great step towards regaining the faith of the 
American people as we pass the College Cost Reduction Act to provide 
hundreds of thousands of American families with the opportunity to 
create a better life for their children. I am proud to be a part of 
that effort.
  The College Cost Reduction Act is a fiscally responsible bill which 
makes the single largest investment in college aid since the GI Bill, 
which, as we all know, provided our Greatest Generation with the 
opportunity to create the Nation we know today.
  This legislation invests over $20 billion in student aid, and does so 
with no additional cost to the taxpayers.
  Before I close, Mr. Speaker, I want to again applaud the 
extraordinary leadership of Chairman George Miller in making college 
affordability a top priority.

                              {time}  1045

  Under his guidance, all of the members of the Education and Labor 
Committee have crafted a good bill that works for our families and our 
country.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this investment 
in our children, in our economy and in our future, to keep faith with 
the American people, and to send a clear message that the American 
Dream is not a relic of the past, but a cornerstone of our future.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the 
yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________