[House Report 118-71]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
118th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 118-71
======================================================================
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5,
UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION RELATING TO ``WAIVERS AND MODIFICATIONS OF FEDERAL STUDENT
LOANS''
_______
May 18, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Ms. Foxx, from the Committee on Education and the Workforce, submitted
the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H.J. Res. 45]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Education and the Workforce, to whom was
referred the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 45) providing for
congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United
States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of
Education relating to ``Waivers and Modifications of Federal
Student Loans'', having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon without amendment and recommends that the joint
resolution do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of H.J. Res 45 is to disapprove of the rule
related to ``Waivers and Modifications of Federal Student
Loans,'' which was first announced on August 24, 2022, and
published in the Federal Register on October 12, 2022.
COMMITTEE ACTION
117TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearings
On April 28, 2021, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce held a hearing on ``Building Back Better: Investing
in Improving Schools, Creating Jobs, and Strengthening Families
and our Economy.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine
the Biden administration's American Jobs Plan and American
Families Plan, which included discussions about the federal
student loan program and its impact on college affordability
Testifying before the Committee were Dr. Neal McCluskey,
Director, Center for Educational Freedom, CATO Institute,
Washington, D.C.; Mr. Brian Riedl, Senior Fellow, Manhattan
Institute, Washington, D.C.; Mr. Mark Mitsui, President,
Portland Community College, Portland, Oregon; Mr. Rasheed
Malik, Senior Policy Analyst, Early Childhood Policy, Center
for American Progress, Washington, D.C.; Ms. Mary Filardo,
Founder and Executive Director, 21st Century School Fund,
Washington, D.C.
On September 30, 2021, the Committee's Higher Education and
Workforce Investment Subcommittee held a hearing on
``Protecting Students and Taxpayers: Improving the Closed
School Discharge Process.'' The purpose of the hearing was to
learn about improvements to the process for discharging loans
for federal student loan borrowers whose school abruptly
closes. Testifying before the subcommittee was Ms. Robyn Smith,
Senior Attorney, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, Los
Angeles, CA; Ms. Melissa Emrey-Arras, Director of Education,
Workforce and Income Security, Governmental Accountability
Office, Washington, D.C.; Mr. Preston Cooper, Research Fellow,
Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, Washington D.C.;
Ms. Karyn Rhodes, Student Borrower, American Business
Institute, Torrance, CA.
On October 26, 2021, the Committee's Higher Education and
Workforce Investment Subcommittee held a hearing on ``Examining
the Policies and Priorities of the Office of Federal Student
Aid.'' The purpose of the hearing was to hear from the Chief
Operating Officer of Federal Student Aid about the policies and
priorities of the agency. Testimony was received regarding
student loan debt forgiveness and pauses to borrowers'
obligations to pay their debt. Testifying before the committee
was Mr. Richard Cordray, Chief Operating Officer, Office of
Federal Student Aid, Washington, D.C.
On November 17, 2021, the Committee's Joint Subcommittee on
Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education (ECESE)
held a hearing on ``Examining the Implementation of COVID-19
Education Funds.'' The purpose of the hearing was to conduct
oversight of the Education Stabilization Fund (ESF), though
oversight of the administration's actions related to the
federal student loan program were discussed. Testifying before
the subcommittee were The Honorable Cindy Marten, Deputy
Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.; The
Honorable James Kvaal, Under Secretary, U.S. Department of
Education, Washington, D.C.
Second Session--Hearings
On May 26, 2022, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce held a hearing on ``Examining the Policies and
Priorities of the U.S. Department of Education.'' The purpose
of the hearing was to review the Fiscal Year 2023 budget
priorities of the U.S. Department of Education. Testifying
before the Committee was The Honorable Miguel Cardona,
Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.
On July 19, 2022, the Committee's Higher Education and
Workforce Investment Subcommittee held a hearing on ``The
History and continued Contributions of Tribal Colleges and
Universities.'' Testimony was received regarding student loan
debt forgiveness and solutions to improve the federal student
loan program. Testifying before the Committee was Dr. Sandra
Boham, President, Salish Kootenai College, Pablo, MT; Ms.
Carrie Billy, President and CEO, American Indian Higher
Education Consortium, Alexandria, VA; Dr. Beth Akers, Senior
Fellow, American Enterprise Institute, Washington D.C.; and Dr.
Cynthia Lindquist, President, Cankdeska Cikana Community
College, Fort Totten, ND.
118TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearings
On February 8, 2023, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce held a hearing on ``American Education in Crisis.''
The purpose of the hearing was to examine the state of
education, including higher education and the status of pauses
in federal student loan programs, in the United States.
Testifying before the Committee were Ms. Virginia Gentles,
Director, Education Freedom Center, Independent Women's Forum,
Arlington, VA; Dr. Monty Sullivan, President, Louisiana
Community and Technical College System, Baton Rouge, LA; The
Honorable Jared Polis, Governor, State of Colorado, Denver, CO;
Mr. Scott Pulsipher, President, Western Governors University,
Salt Lake City, UT.
On March 23, 2023, the Committee's Higher Education and
Workforce Development subcommittee held a hearing on ``Breaking
the System: Examining the Implications of Biden's Student Loan
Policies for Student's and Taxpayers.'' The purpose of the
hearing was to discuss with policy experts the harms of the
Biden administration's loan cancellation policies for students,
taxpayers, and the economy. Testifying before the subcommittee
were Mr. Marc Goldwein, Senior Vice President and Senior Policy
Director, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget,
Washington, D.C.; Dr. Adam Looney, Director, Marriner S. Eccles
Institute for Economics and Quantitative Analysis, University
of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Mr. Sameer Gadkaree, President,
the Institute for College Access & Success, Los Angeles,
California; Dr. Carlo Salerno, Economist and Financial Aid
Expert, Los Angeles, CA.
Legislative Action
On March 27, 2023, Rep. Bob Good (R-VA) introduced H.J.
Res. 45, Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter
8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the
Department of Education relating to ``Waivers and Modifications
of Federal Student Loans'' with Reps. Foxx (R-NC), Wilson (R-
SC), Walberg (R-MI), Grothman (R-WI), Stefanik (R-NY), Allen
(R-GA), Banks (R-IN), Smucker (R-PA), Owens (R-UT), McClain (R-
MI), Miller (R-IL), Letlow (R-LA), Bean (R-FL), Burlinson (R-
MO), Houchin (R-IN), Crenshaw (R-TX), Duncan (R-SC), Edwards
(R-NC), Ezell (R-MS), Gimenez (R-FL), Norman (R-SC), Hageman
(R-WY), Lamborn (R-CO), Hern (R-OK), Rutherford (R-FL), Scott
(R-GA), Mann (R-KS), Murphy (R-NC), Miller-Meeks (R-LA),
Pfluger (R-TX), Calvert (R-CA), Ferguson (R-GA), Smith (R-MO),
Donalds (R-FL), Perry (R-PA), Posey (R-FL), Arrington (R-TX),
Spartz (R-IN), Guest (R-MS), Granger (R-TX), Biggs (R-AZ) as
original co-sponsors. The bill was referred solely to the
Committee on Education and the Workforce. On May 10, 2023, the
Committee considered H.J. Res. 45 in legislative session and
reported it favorably to the House of Representatives by a
recorded vote of 24-18.
COMMITTEE VIEWS
INTRODUCTION
Since taking office, the Biden administration has attempted
to ram its radical free college agenda through the backdoor by
transferring hundreds of billions of dollars in federal student
loan debt to taxpayers.\1\ Through radical expansions of
generous forgiveness programs, expansive new regulations, and
the continuation of the now three-year pause in repayment,
taxpayers may ultimately spend nearly $1 trillion discharging
loans since the repayment moratorium first began in March
2020.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\https://www.aei.org/studentdebtforgivenesstracker/
\2\https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
3.23.23_goldwein_testimony.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 17, 2023, the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) concluded that the Department's Waivers and Modifications
meet the definition of a rule under the Congressional Review
Act (CRA). The CRA provides Congress with a mechanism to review
federal agency actions that meet the law's definition of
``rule.'' Enacted in 1996 as part of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, the CRA requires agencies
to report the issuance of ``rules'' to Congress and provides
Congress with special fast-track procedures under which to
consider legislation that overturns a rule. A joint resolution
of disapproval will become effective once both houses of
Congress pass a joint resolution and once it is signed by the
President or the President's veto is overridden. Thus, the GAO
determined that the Department's Waivers and Modifications are
subject to the requirement that they be submitted to Congress
as required under the law.
In response, Rep. Bob Good (R-VA.) and Senate Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Ranking Member Bill
Cassidy (R-LA.) introduced H.J. Res. 45 on March 27. The joint
resolution will overturn President Biden's Debt Relief Plan and
prevent any further extension of the pause on federal student
loan repayment. H.J. Res. 45 takes an important first step
towards stopping the Biden administration's student loan scam
by barring the discharge of up to $20,000 in federal student
loans for borrowers making up to $125,000 ($250,000 for married
couples) and preventing any further extension of the repayment
pause. These Biden administration actions, first announced on
August 24, 2022,\3\ would ultimately cost taxpayers $315.6
billion and would have unprecedented repercussions for students
and taxpayers if implemented.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/
2022/-biden-announces-student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-need-it-
most/
\4\https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59102
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAD FOR STUDENTS
Tuition and fees have increased nearly three times the rate
of inflation over the last two decades,\5\ largely because of
generous subsidies provided by taxpayers in the form of grants
and loans to help households pay for their degree programs.
Indeed, ample evidence exists that when taxpayers increasingly
foot the bill, colleges capture more and more in the form of
higher prices. For instance, in 2017, economists at the Federal
Reserve of New York found that for every increase in subsidized
student loans, tuition increased by 60 cents;\6\ a recent 2023
study also found that increased availability of generous
graduate loans raised students' cost of attendance dollar for
dollar.\7\ Moreover, studies have shown that colleges reduce
their own grant aid by as much as 83 cents for each dollar
students receive in federal student aid.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-or-century-8/
\6\https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr733.html
\7\https://lesleyjturner.com/GradPLUS_Feb2023.pdf
\8\https://www.mercatus.org/research/policy-briefs/reevaluating-
effects-federal-financing-higher-education
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exacerbates Root Causes of Student Debt
This evidence suggests that broad-based debt cancellation
will lead to substantial increases in college prices for
prospective students, resulting in additional and excessive
borrowing, including by those who would never have taken out
student loans in the first place. Indeed, even if the
President's debt transfer plan goes through, outstanding
federal student loan debt would return to its current level of
$1.6 trillion in just five and a half years.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
3.23.23_goldwein_testimony.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The repayment pause also continues to sow confusion and
chaos among borrowers who have had almost zero contact with
their servicers since the pause began. Time and time again the
Biden administration has extended the now three-year long
moratorium on federal student loan repayments for what it said
was the ``final'' time. And every time borrowers were forced to
readjust and prepare their finances only for the Department to
change its mind. Such uncertainty is exacerbated by false
claims that H.J. Res. 45 would force borrowers to make payments
on their loans during the months in which the payment pause was
in effect; while the resolution critically ends the repayment
pause, in addition preventing the President's bailout from
moving forward, it does nothing to direct the Department to
force payments that were otherwise not required or to take away
borrower's progress towards income-driven repayment or public
service loan forgiveness. Nonetheless, these false claims are
an example of the unnecessary and avoidable confusion caused by
the Department's actions: they make it nearly impossible for
students to budget effectively when people most need to do so,
as reckless Democrat complicates taxpayers' lives harder each
month that the repayment pause continues.
BAD FOR TAXPAYERS
Since March 2020, most federal student loan borrowers have
not had to pay a single penny on their student loans at a cost
to taxpayers of $5 billion each month that the repayment pause
continues (that is $200 billion to date).\10\ The repayment
pause is exacerbating Biden's inflation crisis caused by his
party's reckless spending spree. According to the Committee for
a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), the latest extension of
the repayment pause increased inflation by 20 basis points;\11\
Biden's student loan bailout could increase inflation by an
additional 27 basis points if it goes forward.\12\ Thus,
Biden's bailout isn't even benefitting borrowers in the short
term. To make matters worse, loan forgiveness of white collar
workers is making it harder for blue collar workers to put food
on their table and gas in their cars--both in the present and
in the future. Moreover, coupled with his income-driven
repayment plan, Biden's student loan scams could cost as much
as $3,527 per taxpayer.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\Ibid.
\11\https://www.crfb.org/blogs/extending-student-loan-payment-
pause-bad-policy
\12\https://www.crfb.org/blogs/student-debt-changes-would-boost-
inflation
\13\https://www.ntu.org/publications/detail/ntu-supports-
resolution-to-stop-president-bidens-unilateral-student-debt-plan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Untargeted Benefits
Moreover, the unemployment rate is at a near 50-year low,
at just 2 percent for college graduates. Indeed, Biden's
student loan bailout benefit is untargeted and
disproportionately benefits higher-income Americans and those
who borrowed for graduate school. Two-thirds of Biden's bailout
would go to the top half of earners.\14\ Among federal student
loan borrowers leaving school in 2024, 70 percent of debt will
be owed by students who went to graduate school, and 39 percent
of the total will be owed by graduate students expected to earn
more than $100,000 annually during their careers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\https://www.crfb.org/blogs/bidens-student-debt-cancellation-
plan-still-regressive
\15\https://www.regulations.gov/document/ED-2023-OPE-0004-0001v
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exacerbates our Nation's Fiscal Crisis
The federal government currently spends as much on interest
payments on the debt as it does on many of our safety net
programs combined.\16\ At a price tag of $315 billion, the
administration's student loan bailout will reduce economic
growth and saddle future generations with unsustainable debt;
it is the last thing we need on our nation's credit card. Money
cannot be printed out of thin air without any consequences,
despite what the administration's actions seem to suggest.
Biden's actions will make the student loan program even more
expensive for taxpayers by setting the precedent that loans do
not need to be repaid. Future borrowers will take on debt
expecting forgiveness, causing the student loan program to only
increase in costs for future generations. Moreover,
inflationary spending puts more pressure on the Federal Reserve
to raise interest rates, which disrupts the financial, housing,
and labor markets and risks pushing the economy into a
recession.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\https://www.crfb.org/blogs/net-interest-payments-topped-475-
billion-fy-2022
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
President Biden's student loan scam is illegal, unfair, and
immoral. There is no such thing as debt ``forgiveness.''
President Biden is simply transferring the debt from borrowers
who willingly took out student loans to hardworking taxpayers
who did not. This is no insignificant portion of the
population: in fact, eighty-seven percent of Americans did not
take out loans.\17\ This number includes those who did not go
to college, who worked to avoid loans, or who had the grit to
pay their loans back. In total, the President's illegal student
loan schemes could cost taxpayers nearly $1 trillion dollars--
that's more than the federal government has spent on
postsecondary education in our entire history.\18\ H.J. Res. 45
is a critical first step to stopping the President's reckless
``free'' college agenda by barring $315 billion in taxpayer
funds from being transferred from those who willingly took out
student loans to those who did not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\https://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-papers/student-loan-
forgiveness-a-handout-for-the-rich
\18\https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
3.23.23_goldwein_testimony.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
H.J. Resolution 45 resolves that Congress disapproves of
the rule related to ``Waivers and Modifications of Federal
Student Loans,'' which was first announced on August 24, 2022,
and was published in the Federal Register on October 12, 2022.
EXPLANATION OF AMENDMENTS
No amendments were proposed, considered, or adopted.
APPLICATION OF LAW TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a
description of the application of this bill to the legislative
branch. H.J. Res. 45 takes an important step towards reigning
in executive overreach and preventing the Department of
Education from unilaterally transferring federal student loan
debt to taxpayers.
UNFUNDED MANDATE STATEMENT
Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act (as amended by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, P.L. 104-4) requires a statement of
whether the provisions of the reported bill include unfunded
mandates. This issue is addressed in the CBO letter.
EARMARK STATEMENT
H.J. Res. 45 does not contain any congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9 of House rule XXI.
ROLL CALL VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee Report to include for
each record vote on a motion to report the measure or matter
and on any amendments offered to the measure or matter the
total number of votes for and against and the names of the
Members voting for and against.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
In accordance with clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the
goal of H.J. Res. 45 is to disapprove of the rule submitted by
the Department of Education relating to ``Waivers and
Modifications of Federal Student Loans'' (including the website
announcement entitled ``One-Time Federal Student Loans,'')
announced on August 24, 2022 and published in the federal
registrar on October 12, 2022 to protect the interests of
student loan borrowers who paid their debts, those without
college attendance who would be forced to pay for debts
incurred by others, and the Federal government.
DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
No provision of H.J. Res. 45 establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
STATEMENT OF OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in the body of this report.
REQUIRED COMMITTEE HEARING AND RELATED HEARINGS
In compliance with clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII the
following hearings held during the 118th Congress were used to
develop or consider H.J. Res. 45: ``Breaking the System:
Examining the Implications of Biden's Student Loan Policies for
Student's and Taxpayers (2023)''.
The following related hearings were held: ``Building Back
Better: Investing in Improving Schools, Creating Jobs, and
Strengthening Families and our Economy (2021),'' ``Protecting
Students and Taxpayers: Improving the Closed School Discharge
Process (2021),'' ``Examining the Policies and Priorities of
the Office of Federal Student Aid (2021),'' ``Examining the
Implementation of COVID-19 Education Funds (2021),''
``Examining the Policies and Priorities of the U.S. Department
of Education (2022),'' ``The History and continued
Contributions of Tribal Colleges and Universities (2022),'' and
``American Education in Crisis (2023)''.
NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND CBO COST ESTIMATE
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the committee has received
the following estimate for H.J. Res. 45 from the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office:
Resolution summary: H.J. Res. 45 would disapprove the rule
relating to ``Waivers and Modifications of Federal Student
Loans,'' issued by the Department of Education and published in
the Federal Register on October 12, 2022. The resolution would
invoke a legislative process established by the Congressional
Review Act, which would repeal the rule and prohibit the
department from issuing the same or similar rules in the
future.
The October rule made final an announcement made on August
24, 2022, which extended the pause for payments, interest
accrual, and collections of student loans from September 1,
2022, to December 31, 2022, and created a onetime loan
cancellation program. Under that program, borrowers whose
income fell below specified limits would be eligible for
cancellation of up to $10,000 of student loan debt issued on or
before June 30, 2022. Borrowers who also had received at least
one Pell grant would be eligible for cancellation of an
additional $10,000 in such debt.
Estimated Federal cost: The costs of the legislation,
detailed in Table 1, fall within budget function 500
(education, training, employment, and social services).
Table 1.--Estimated Budgetary Effects of H.J. Res. 45
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2023-2028 2023-22033
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increases or Decreases (-) in Direct Spending
Estimated Budget Authority............ -319,550 380 385 390 395 400 400 405 410 410 410 -317,600 -315,565
Estimated Outlays..................... -319,570 375 385 390 390 395 400 400 405 410 410 -317,635 -315,610
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBO expects that if loan cancellation was repealed, the cost to administer the larger volume of loans in repayment would increase; any spending would be subject to the availability of
appropriated funds.
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
resolution will be enacted in June 2023. As required under the
Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (FCRA), most of the costs of
the federal student loan program are estimated on a net-
present-value basis. A present value is a single number that
expresses a flow of current and future payments in terms of an
equivalent lump sum received or paid today. Under FCRA, the
present value of all loan-related cash flows is calculated by
discounting those expected cash flows to the year of
disbursement, using the rates for comparable maturities on
Treasury borrowing. For changes to the cost of outstanding
loans, the estimated costs or savings are shown in the year in
which the legislation making those changes is enacted. The cost
of the federal government's administration of student loans is
estimated on a cash basis.
Direct spending: CBO estimates that enacting H.J. Res. 45
would reduce direct spending, on a net-present-value basis, by
$319.6 billion in 2023, and by $315.6 billion over the 2023-
2033 period.
Loan Cancellation. Under current law, CBO expects that
borrowers whose outstanding debt is canceled will pay less in
principal and interest than they would if that policy was
repealed. The estimated savings is the present value of the
borrowers' projected payments of principal and interest on
student loans before accounting for the repeal of that policy,
minus the present value of payments after doing so. Under both
scenarios, the present value is calculated by discounting the
payments the government receives, using methods specified in
FCRA.
CBO estimates that the net-present-value of the increase in
future cash inflows from borrowers--if the Administration's
loan cancellation plan was repealed--would total $320 billion,
thus reducing direct spending in 2023. The loan cancellation
policy's implementation has been suspended while the Supreme
Court reviews the plan. CBO's estimate will be updated after a
decision is released.
On January 11, 2023, the Department of Education published
a proposed rule in the Federal Register to create a new income-
driven repayment (IDR) plan for federal student loans.
Following CBO's long-standing convention for incorporating the
effects of proposed rules into its baseline, the baseline
reflects 50 percent of the estimated costs of the proposed IDR
plan. CBO has reduced its estimate of loan cancellation to
reflect the additional forgiveness of existing loan balances
that are set to occur under the proposed IDR plan. Once the
Department of Education publishes the final rule, the baseline
will incorporate 100 percent of the estimated cost of the new
plan and CBO will update its estimate of loan cancellation to
reflect that change.
Payment Pause. CBO's baseline incorporates the assumption
that the current pause on payments, interest accrual, and
collections will end on August 30, 2023. CBO does not expect
that enacting H.J. Res. 45 would affect the current pause
because it does not expect that repayments could be restarted
before that date. Enacting the resolution would prevent the
department from extending the pause beyond August. However,
because the baseline does not incorporate an assumption that
the pause will be extended, CBO estimates that the provision
would have no effect on direct spending.
Administrative Costs. Some costs for the administration of
student loans, such as payments to agencies that collect
defaulted loans, are classified in the budget as direct
spending and shown on a cash, rather than accrual, basis.
Repealing the Administration's proposed loan cancellation would
result in higher loan volume from more borrowers, and thus,
additional administrative costs. If debt cancellation were
repealed, CBO estimates, roughly 16 million borrowers whose
full debts would otherwise be cancelled, would still have
remaining balances. CBO estimates that enacting H.J. Res. 45
would increase direct spending for administrative costs by
about $4 billion over the 2023-2033 period.
Spending subject to appropriation: Additional funding to
administer the student loan program is provided each year in
appropriation acts. In fiscal year 2023, the Congress
appropriated $2.0 billion for student aid administration, which
is used to administer student loans and other student aid
programs. CBO expects that if loan cancellation was repealed,
the cost to administer the larger volume of loans in repayment
would increase; any spending would be subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
Uncertainty: Although CBO aims to develop estimates of
budgetary effects of legislation that are in the middle of the
distribution of potential outcomes, the estimates of the
effects of student loan cancellation are highly uncertain. In
particular, significant uncertainty surrounds CBO's projections
of how much borrowers will repay after the cancellation of
their debt and how much they would repay if that policy was
repealed.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or
revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those
pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in Table 1.
Increase in long-term net direct spending: CBO estimates
that enacting H.J. Res. 45 would increase net direct spending
by more than $2.5 billion in at least one of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2034.
CBO estimates that enacting H.J. Res. 45 would not increase
on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2034.
Mandates: None.
Previous CBO estimates: On April 25, 2023, CBO published a
letter detailing the estimated budgetary effects of H.R. 2811,
the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023, as posted on the website of
the House Committee on Rules on April 19, 2023. Subsections 1
and 2 of section 211(a) of that bill are similar to H.J. Res.
45 and CBO's estimates are the same for both pieces of
legislation.
In September 2022, CBO published a letter about the costs
of suspending student loan payments and canceling debt. In that
letter, CBO estimated the total cost of cancellation at about
$400 billion over the 2023-2033 period, on a net-present-value
basis. CBO has since lowered its estimate to reflect additional
administrative actions, including the proposed IDR plan and
CBO's most recent economic forecast.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Leah Koestner,
Mandates: Andrew Laughlin.
Estimate reviewed by: Justin Humphrey, Chief, Finance,
Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit; H. Samuel
Papenfuss, Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.
Estimate approved by: Phillip L. Swagel, Director,
Congressional Budget Office.
COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE
Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison of the
costs that would be incurred in carrying out H.J. Res. 45.
However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides that this
requirement does not apply when, as with the present report,
the committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
As reported by the Committee, H.J. Res. 45 makes no changes
in existing law.
MINORITY VIEWS
INTRODUCTION
H.J. Res. 45, Providing for congressional disapproval under
chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted
by the Department of Education relating to ``Waivers and
Modifications of Federal Student Loans,'' would nullify the
Biden Administration's One-time Federal Student Loan Debt
Relief plan, the pause on federal student loan payments, and
other crucial student loan program waivers and modifications
from September 2022 to December 2022. If enacted, H.J. Res. 45
would sow chaos through the federal loan system at a crucial
point in the program's administration. Further, it would
jeopardize the both the Biden administration and any future
administration's ability to respond appropriately during
emergencies to support the economic well-being of students and
borrowers.
STUDENT LOAN WAIVERS AND MODIFICATIONS UNDER THE HEROES ACT AUTHORITY
Student Loan Payment Pause
The federal student loan payment pause was first
implemented under the Trump Administration through the CARES
Act in response to the pandemic and was extended two times
under President Trump.\1\ The Biden Administration subsequently
extended the payment pause,\2\ which is still in effect today.
Both the Trump and Biden Administrations were authorized to
extend the payment pause through the Higher Education Relief
Opportunities for Students (HEROES Act) Act of 2003.\3\ The
HEROES Act authorizes the Secretary of Education (Secretary) to
``waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision
acceptable to'' the Title IV loan programs ``as the Secretary
deems necessary'' to ensure individuals affected by a national
emergency ``are not placed in a worse position financially . .
.''\4\ Under the HEROES Act, the Secretary does not need to go
through a rulemaking procedure to effectuate an action.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\A week before the CARES Act became law, on March 20, 2020, the
office of Federal Student Aid began suspension of loan payments,
stopped collections on defaulted loans, and instituted a 0% interest
rate, all using HEROES Act authority.
\2\Kevin M. Lewis & Edward C. Liu, Congr. Rsch. Serv., LSB10568,
The Biden Administration Extends the Pause on Federal Student Loan
Payments: Legal Considerations for Congress, 1 (2021), https://
crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10568.
\3\Id. at 2.
\4\Id. at 4.
\5\Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One-time Student Debt Relief
In August 2022, the Biden Administration announced a plan
to forgive up to $10,000 of student loan debt for non-Pell
Grant recipients and up to $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients
for individuals earning up to $125,000, married couples up to
$250,000; dependent undergraduate students may qualify based on
their parents adjusted gross income.\6\ Most federal loans
disbursed on or before June 30, 2022 are eligible for
forgiveness, with the exception of commercially-held Federal
Family Education Loans (FFEL) and Perkins loans.\7\ As part of
the debt relief plan's rollout, the Administration released
memos explaining the plan's legal justification, arguing that
the debt relief plan, just like the payment pause, was legal
use of existing authority under the HEROES Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\The White House, Fact Sheet: President Biden Announces Student
Loan Relief for Borrowers Who Need It Most (August 24, 2022), https://
www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/24/fact-
sheet-president-biden-announces-student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-
need-it-most/.
\7\Federal Student Aid, One-time Federal Student Loan Debt Relief
(Accessed May 16, 2023), https://studentaid.gov/manage-loans/
forgiveness-cancellation/debt-relief-info; Cory Turner, In a reversal,
the Education Dept. is excluding many from student loan relief, NPR
(Updated September 30, 2022), https://www.npr.org/2022/09/29/
1125923528/biden-student-loans-debt-cancellation-ffel-perkins.
\8\Use of the HEROES Act of 2003 to Cancel the Principal Amounts of
Student Loans, 46 Op. O.L.C. __ (August 23, 2022), https://
www.justice.gov/olc/file/1528451/download; Notice of Debt Cancellation
Legal Memorandum, 87 Fed. Reg. 52943 (August 30, 2022) https://
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/08/30/2022-18731/notice-of-debt-
cancellation-legal-memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the plan, up to 43 million borrowers would be
eligible for debt relief, with roughly 20 million eligible for
full forgiveness of their outstanding loan balance.\9\ Ninety
percent of relief under the plan would benefit borrowers
earning less than $75,000 a year.\10\ Currently, 26 million
borrowers have either applied for or are already automatically
eligible for debt relief, and over 16 million of these
applications have already been approved. In marking up and
favorably reporting H.J. Res. 45 to the House, Committee
Republicans are attempting to block one-time debt relief to
roughly 2,022,800 of their own constituents.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\The White House, Fact Sheet: President Biden Announces Student
Loan Relief for Borrowers Who Need It Most (August 24, 2022), https://
www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/24/fact-
sheet-president-biden-announces-student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-
need-it-most/.
\10\Id.
\11\U.S. Dep't of Educ., Student Debt Relief Application Data by
Congressional Jurisdiction, https://www2.ed.gov/documents/coronavirus/
congressional-district-debt-relief-data.xlsx.
Number of Borrowers in Committee Republican Districts Who Will Be Denied One-Time Debt Relief
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of people
Estimated Number who applied or Number of fully-
of Borrowers were deemed approved
Congressional District Eligible for automatically applications sent
Student Debt eligible for to loan servicers
Relief relief for discharge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA-03.................................................. 63,500 38,600 23,500
CA-39.................................................. 95,600 56,000 36,700
CA-45.................................................. 73,400 47,900 31,000
FL-04.................................................. 119,300 69,100 44,700
GA-12.................................................. 110,100 66,000 42,900
IL-15.................................................. 76,100 46,800 30,300
IN-03.................................................. 96,400 56,900 36,400
IN-09.................................................. 89,700 54,600 35,000
KS-04.................................................. 106,100 61,500 39,600
KY-01.................................................. 84,900 48,700 32,400
LA-05.................................................. 104,100 57,500 35,900
MI-05.................................................. 93,800 55,700 36,900
MI-09.................................................. 92,900 60,000 38,800
MI-10.................................................. 104,700 69,500 47,300
MO-07.................................................. 100,800 56,100 35,900
NC-05.................................................. 75,900 46,300 29,700
NY-21.................................................. 96,900 59,300 37,700
NY-22.................................................. 115,400 75,200 48,200
OR-05.................................................. 86,000 53,400 34,100
PA-11.................................................. 87,400 57,600 37,700
PA-15.................................................. 82,700 52,000 32,500
SC-02.................................................. 115,600 73,800 46,100
TX-01.................................................. 88,400 47,100 30,600
UT-04.................................................. 77,700 49,100 31,800
VA-05.................................................. 90,700 56,300 35,700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is worth noting that in reference to the history of
waivers and modifications under the HEROES Act, the Department
has stipulated the following:
Prior to the COVID-19 emergency, exercises of HEROES
Act authority protected student borrowers who were on
active military duty, who were performing qualifying
National Guard duty, or who lived or worked in disaster
areas. The relief included waiving the requirement that
borrowers return overpayments of certain grant funds;
waiving the requirement that service be uninterrupted
to qualify for loan cancellation on the basis of
employment in certain occupations; extending the
maximum period of forbearance for Perkins loans and
eligibility for deferment of Family Education Loans;
and requiring the Department to pay the interest that
accrues during extended deferments. In response to the
COVID-19 emergency, both Secretary DeVos and Secretary
Cardona exercised their HEROES Act authority to suspend
payment of interest and principal on student loans held
by the Department and to count each month of non-
payment toward any loan forgiveness program for which
the borrower would have otherwise qualified and was
seeking.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\Letter from Lisa Brown, General Counsel, U.S. Dep't of Educ.,
to Shari Brewster, Assistant General Counsel for Appropriations Law,
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 7-8 (Feb. 22, 2023), https://
www2.ed.gov/documents/gao-cra-response-22223-signed.pdf (citations
omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability of the Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act (CRA) gives Congress the
opportunity to nullify certain actions by federal agencies.\13\
Under the CRA, federal agencies must submit to Congress a
report on each new rule promulgated before the rule can take
effect.\14\ The CRA allows Congress a prescribed period to
review and disapprove federal agency rules\15\ and if a
resolution of disapproval is passed by both branches of
Congress and signed by the President, then the rule has no
force or effect.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et seq.
\14\5 U.S.C. Sec. 801(a)(1)(A).
\15\5 U.S.C. Sec. 802.
\16\5 U.S.C. Sec. 801(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just like with all previous pandemic actions made using
HEROES Act authority, the Department did not submit the August
2022 extension of the payment pause and the debt relief plan to
Congress as a rule. If a member of Congress believes an agency
action does constitute a rule, they may ask the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to issue a legal opinion on the
question. On March 17, 2023, the GAO concluded after a request
was made by Reps. Foxx (R-NC), Good (R-VA), and Miller-Meeks
(R-IA) and Sens. Cassidy (R-LA) and Cornyn (R-TX), that the
Department's waivers and modifications action taken on August
22, 2022 did in fact meet the definition of a rule for purposes
of the CRA.\17\ Therefore, these waivers and modifications
(both the September--December 2022 payment pause and the One
Time Student Debt Relief Plan) were subject to the requirement
that they be submitted to Congress as a rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., U.S. Department of Education--
Applicability of the Congressional Review Act to the Department of
Education's Student Loan Debt Relief Website and Accompanying Federal
Register Publication, 1 (March 17, 2023), https://www.gao.gov/products/
b-334644.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While Committee Democrats recognize that the decision of
GAO is final and binding, it should be noted that no other
usage of HEROES Act authority has been submitted by a Member of
Congress for GAO to make a legal determination.\18\ If
Committee Republicans believe, as GAO has asserted, that
waivers and modifications under the HEROES Act constitute a
rule per CRA, then why have they not challenged any of the
pauses authorized under President Trump, or other pauses
initiated under President Biden? It is clear Committee
Republicans sought this opinion in this instance not to ensure
proper enactment of executive action, but because they will
stop at nothing to attempt to derail President Biden's goal of
providing student loan debt relief to millions of Americans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\GAO noted this in their opinion remarking they were not asked
to analyze those pauses by a Member of Congress, and that the fact
those prior actions were not challenged is not dispositive as it
relates as to whether the action they were asked to provide an opinion
on is a rule or not. See id. at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREVIOUS REPUBLICAN ATTACKS ON ONE-TIME DEBT RELIEF
H.J. Res. 45 is not the first attempt by Republicans to
attack the Biden Administration's one-time student loan debt
relief plan. The plan is currently on hold due to two court
cases that the U.S. Supreme Court heard on February 28--Biden
v. Nebraska\19\ and Department of Education v. Brown\20\--
brought or championed by conservatives challenging the plan on
differing legal grounds.\21\ The Supreme Court's ruling is
expected by the end of June 2023, and the debt relief plan is
already on hold until the disposition of that case.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\See Brief for Respondents, Biden v. Nebraska, No. 22-506
(2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-506/253353/
20230127155912043_2023.01.27%20- %20Respondents%20Brief%20FINAL.pdf.
\20\Brief for Respondents, U.S. Dep't of Educ. v. Brown, No. 22-535
(2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-535/ 253308/
20230127141422535_22-535 %20Respondents%20Brief%20Final.pdf.
\21\Dan Mangan, Supreme Court takes second case challenging Biden
student loan relief, CNBC (last visited May 16, 2023), https://
www.cnbc.com/2022/12/12/supreme-court-takes-2nd-biden-student-loan-
relief-challenge.html.
\22\Cora Lewis, Supreme Court student loan hearing: What you Need
to know, AP News (last visited May 17, 2023), https://apnews.com/
article/ student-loan-forgiveness-scotus-what-to-know-
06a8ac6187fb39b2edc2cf5a379c22c0#: :text=The%20relief%20under%20Biden's%
20plan, student%20loans%2C%20not%20private%20loans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not content with a hold on the program pending Supreme
Court review, on April 26, House Republicans passed their
Limit, Save, Grow Act, with 4 Republicans joining all voting
Democrats in opposition.\23\ This bill, better titled the
Default on America Act, would require 22 percent across the
board cuts to all non-defense discretionary spending over the
next ten years.\24\ In addition to these harmful cuts to
funding for low-income students, students with disabilities,
and student mental health services, the bill would rescind both
the debt relief program and program changes the Biden
Administration proposed to the Income Driven Repayment (IDR)
plan.\25\ It would also prohibit the Department, under any
Administration, from drafting or proposing any ``economically
significant regulations'' or executive action regarding federal
student loans.\26\ This thoroughly unserious bill is the
vehicle House Republicans are using as a starting point in
their negotiations with the White House over ensuring America
does not default on its debts.\27\ House Republicans have
already voted to overturn the debt relief program and go a step
further to prohibit any future regulatory changes to the loan
program, but are still moving forward with H.J. Res. 45 in what
seems like a truly fruitless endeavor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\H.R. 2811, 118th Congress, Sec. 212 (2023).
\24\Id.
\25\U.S. Dep't of Educ., Fact Sheet: House Republican proposals
Hurt Children, Students, and Borrower, and Undermine Education. (Apr.
25, 2023), https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/ fact-sheet-house-
republican-proposals-hurt-children-students-and-borrowers-and-
undermine-education.
\26\H.R. 2811, 118th Congress, Sec. 212 (2023).
\27\Charles Creitz, Kevin McCarthy: GOP debt ceiling unity prevents
Biden from shunning negotiation, Fox News, May 18, 2023, https://
www.foxnews.com/media/mccarthy-gop- debt-ceiling-unity-prevents-biden-
shunning-negotiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPACT OF H.J. RES. 45 ON ONE-TIME DEBT RELIEF AND THE PAYMENT PAUSE
If enacted, H.J. Res. 45 would prohibit the Biden
Administration from implementing the One-time Federal Student
Loan Debt Relief plan. It would also roll back the loan payment
pause for the months of September through December 2022. It is
important to note that the pause did not just impact payments;
interest accrual and collections are suspended by the pause,
and every month of paused payment also is counted towards
totals of IDR and PSLF payments for borrowers in those
programs. Interest would have to be calculated (and possibly
capitalized on top of existing loan balances), and some
borrowers who had their loans discharged due to payment counts
that included any paused payments from September to December
2022 could arguably be determined NOT to have completed all the
steps necessary to have their loans forgiven. This unwinding
and potential claw back process would be incredibly complicated
and confusing for borrowers, servicers, and likely the
Department as well.
The timing of H.J. Res. 45 could also create more
confusion. Depending on when H.J. Res. 45 is enacted, the
Department could be put in the bizarre position of being
required to restart repayment immediately for payments due
between September and December 2022 while full repayment
remains paused until 60 days after the Supreme Court cases are
resolved or 60 days after June 30 if they are not resolved.
Committee Republicans earlier in this report argue that the
enactment of H.J. Res. 45 would not retroactively impact
payments between September and December 2022 without citing any
source, legal or otherwise to support that assertion. Yet, the
nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) states clearly
that, under the CRA if a joint resolution of disapproval is
enacted, ``the rule would be deemed not to have had any effect
at any time, and even provisions that had become effective
would be retroactively negated.''\28\ Therefore, the payment
pause would be nullified from September to December 2022, and
the Department would need to find a way to address the multiple
implications of H.J. Res. 45's enactment. While Committee
Democrats don't have a crystal ball, it is clear that the
retroactive nature of the Congressional Review Act will create
a confusing, chaotic, and economically challenging landscape
for borrowers as they restart loan payments, and Committee
Republicans refusal to admit the obvious speaks volumes about
their actual agenda.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\Maeve P. Carey & Christopher M. Davis, Cong. Rsch. Serv.,
R43992, The Congressional Review Act (CRA): Frequently Asked Questions,
(2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RETURN TO REPAYMENT CONFUSION FOR BORROWERS
Such a rapid return to repayment in such a haphazard
fashion could create a situation ripe for borrowers to be at
serious risk of delinquency and default. A recent analysis by
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York foreshadowed the reality
that borrowers will likely become delinquent at higher rates
once loan repayments return.\29\ If payments resume without
debt relief, there could be an unprecedented spike of
delinquency and default for the most financially vulnerable
borrowers.\30\ Expediting the return to repayment without a
concrete plan developed by the Department and servicers will
exacerbate this concern. And with a return to immediate
repayment under H.J. Res. 45, collections on defaulted loans
could resume immediately, impacting roughly 6 million
borrowers.\31\ Defaulters could have their wages and taxes
garnished, and older defaulters may lose a portion of their
Social Security payments. This would significantly undermine
the efforts of the Department to support borrowers in default
and delinquency through the Fresh Start program.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\Jacob Goss, et al., Student Loan Repayment during the Pandemic
Forbearance, Federal Reserve Bank of New York: Liberty Street Economics
(March 22, 2022), https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2022/
03/student-loan-repayment-during-the-pandemic-forbearance/.
\30\Jacob Goss, et al., Assessing the Relative Progressivity of the
Biden Administration's Federal Student Loan Forgiveness Proposal,
Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Staff Reports, 21 (No. 1046 January
2023), https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/
staff_reports/sr1046.pdf?sc_lang=en.
\31\Cong. Rsch. Serv., Covid-19 Student Loan Flexibilities and the
Congressional Review Act, (2023) (presentation by the Cong. Rsch. Serv.
on file with author.)
\32\U.S. Dep't of Educ., Off. of Fed.Student Aid, Get Out of
Default With Fresh Start (Accessed May 16, 2023), https://
studentaid.gov/announcements-events/default-fresh-start.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Democrats are very concerned that borrowers could
also have to worry about:
Their monthly payment amount. It is unclear how
long it will take for servicers to be able to operationalize
and accurately implement an unprecedented change to the
servicing system.
How much more they will pay each month due to
uncertainty around interest costs. Borrowers will have to make
multiple months of payments just toward months of unpaid
interest before their payments will lower the principal
balance. Additionally, borrowers won't know how much in
additional loan costs they will pay if their unpaid interest is
capitalized and begins accruing interest, ballooning their
balance, and making payment amounts unclear.
Getting help making payment arrangements with
their servicer or enrolling in repayment plans as tens of
millions of other loan borrowers are seeking to make sense of
their own situation.
Whether they will benefit from safeguards intended
to promote a smooth return to repayment, including easier and
more efficient enrollment and recertification into an income
driven repayment (IDR) plan and protections against debt
collection under the Fresh Start program.
How it is fair or permissible for their servicer
under state or federal law to add interest charges after
telling them payments were not required.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE DEPARTMENT RULES ON LOAN WAIVERS AND
MODIFICATIONS
The CRA prohibits ED from issuing ``a new rule that is
substantially the same as the disapproved rule unless
subsequent law specifically authorizes the reissued rule.''\33\
The enactment of H.J. Res. 45 could have serious long-term
implications for the Biden Administration's future ability to
use executive actions to waive or modify the federal student
loan program quickly in times of emergency or natural disaster.
Committee Democrats firmly believe the executive branch should
continue to have the authority to institute and implement
related executive actions, such as another payment pause, when
necessitated by an emergency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\5 U.S.C. Sec. 801(b); see Maeve P. Carey, Cong. Rsch. Serv.,
IN10996, Reissued Labor Department Rule Tests Congressional Review Act
Ban on Promulgating ``Substantially the Same'' Rules, (2019), https://
www.crs.gov/Reports/IN10996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
At the time of this markup, House Republicans have already
passed their detrimental Limit, Save, Grow Act that would
prohibit the Biden Administration from implementing their one-
time debt relief program. H.J. Res. 45 is just another attempt
by House Republicans to upset a legal agency action with which
they disagree, an attempt that is overwhelmingly likely to
fail. This is not a worthwhile use of this Committee's time.
For the reasons stated above, all Committee Democrats present
unanimously opposed H.J. Res. 45 when the Committee on
Education and the Workforce considered it on May 10, 2023. We
urge the House of Representatives to do the same.
Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
Ranking Member.
Raul M. Grijalva.
Joe Courtney.
Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan.
Mark Takano.
Mark DeSaulnier.
Pramila Jayapal.