[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.