Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under the Rule Submitted By the Department of Education Relating to ``Improving Income Driven Repayment for the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program and the Federal Family Education Loan (Ffel) Program''
Floor Speech
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 88, the Congressional Review Act on Saving on a Valuable Education plan.
Last August, the Department of Education launched the SAVE plan, a new, generous, income-driven repayment, IDR, plan to significantly lower payments for many low-and moderate-income borrowers.
Additionally, if borrowers make their full payment but their full required payment is not enough to cover the accrued interest, the government covers the rest of the interest. This means that the SAVE plan eliminates the indignity of balances growing due to unpaid interest.
The improved application allows borrowers to have their income securely assessed through the Internal Revenue Service so that they don't have to recertify their incomes every year.
Finally, repealing the SAVE plan would be extremely disruptive for millions of Americans enrolled in this program.
In fact, the Department reported last month that 5.5 million borrowers have already enrolled in the program, including nearly 18,000 borrowers in my district and about 8,600 in the district represented by the gentlewoman from North Carolina. They are already enjoying the improvements in the plan and the lower payments.
Mr. Speaker, we are responsible for strengthening support for those seeking a college degree, not just because everyone should be forced to get one, but because those who want a college degree should have access to that opportunity.
As President Johnson noted when he signed the Higher Education Act into law in 1965, he said that it meant that a high school senior anywhere in this great land of ours can apply to any college or university in any of the 50 States and not be turned away because the family is poor.
Repealing the SAVE plan does nothing to make higher education more affordable or accessible, and for that reason, Mr. Speaker, I oppose the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that in my colleague from Virginia's district, there are over 11,000 borrowers already enrolled in the SAVE Plan, which significantly lowered their monthly payments.
I will quote from a letter that we received from the AFT, the American Federation of Teachers, which says, in part: ``For decades, students have been told that a college education is one of the most important vehicles to get ahead, but years of disinvestment and the actions of predatory loan servicers drastically tightened the shackles of debt, destroying students' budgets. And COVID-19 made that predicament far worse. Fortunately, the Biden administration stepped up with a plan to help student loan borrowers.''
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record this letter from AFT and another letter from the National Education Association. AFT, December 4, 2023. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the 1.7 million members of the American Federation of Teachers, I strongly urge you to reject H.J. Res. 88, a joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval of the Saving on a Valuable Education student loan repayment plan, the Biden administration's improvements to income-driven repayment plans.
The SAVE plan is the most affordable student loan repayment plan ever--and is sorely needed.
For decades, students have been told that a college education is one of the most important vehicles to get ahead, but years of disinvestment and the actions of predatory loan servicers drastically tightened the shackles of debt, destroying students' budgets. And COVID-19 made that predicament far worse. Fortunately, the Biden administration stepped up with a plan to help student loan borrowers.
Even as some members of Congress and outside groups have moved to undermine efforts to achieve a more permanent solution for the broken student loan system and its wide- ranging impacts, and have refused to move forward on bold solutions to make college more affordable on the front end, like free college, the president has recognized that there must be a relief valve for those drowning in student loan debt. We fully support the administration doing what is in its power and building on the tool of income-driven repayment to create the SAVE plan.
This plan is the result of a thorough negotiated rulemaking process and of the administration's commitment to helping student loan borrowers who've had their lives derailed by overwhelming student debt. Congress should be building on the Biden administration's actions to make student loans affordable, not undermining those actions.
The SAVE plan will ensure that borrowers never see their balance grow because of accruing interest, as long as they keep up with their required payments; this is particularly significant for public service workers, who all too often nervously watch their balance balloon while working toward Public Service Loan Forgiveness, even as they work hard to make their monthly payments.
The plan also cuts payments on undergraduate loans in half (from 10 percent to 5 percent of a borrower's discretionary income), updates the formula for determining a borrower's discretionary income (to 225 percent of the federal poverty guidelines based on family size), and provides a shorter time to earn forgiveness (10-24 years) for those borrowers who've carried low-balance loans for at least a decade.
Tens of millions of families are struggling under the yoke of $1.7 trillion in student debt, and Congress and the administration must do all they can to provide a lifeline to those drowning in student loans. The SAVE plan is an important piece of that relief, which we fully support. This resolution will show Americans which members of Congress are going out of their way to support loading them up with additional student debt. I urge you to reject this callous resolution. Sincerely, Randi Weingarten, President, American Federation of Teachers. December 5, 2023. Hon. Robert C. Scott, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Scott: On behalf of the National Education Association's 3 million members and the 50 million students they teach and support in public schools and colleges, we urge you to vote NO on H.J. Res. 88, as the Senate has already done. The resolution would use the Congressional Review Act to overturn the Biden-Harris Administration's new rule implementing the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) Plan for federal student loan borrowers. Votes on this issue may be included in the NEA Report Card for the 118th Congress.
Millions of borrowers--many of whom are facing significant financial struggles--are coping with their first student bills since the COVID-19 pandemic. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau found that about 1 in 5 borrowers has risk factors that suggest they will struggle with the resumption of payments. Income-driven repayment (IDR) plans are a key safety net; borrowers enrolled in IDR plans default at much lower rates than those in non-IDR plans. However, for too many borrowers, these plans were not working well enough to protect them from hardship. Many borrowers struggled to navigate the bureaucratic hurdles of enrolling in and staying enrolled in a plan. Even for those who were enrolled, their monthly payments were often too high. In addition, due to interest accrual, many borrowers watched their balances balloon despite making on-time payments for years.
NEA's 2021 report on student loan debt found that no segment of the educator workforce is spared the burden of student loan debt. Four out of 10 educators said struggling to pay off their loans and financial worries about the loans were negatively affecting their physical, mental, and emotional well-being.
The Biden-Harris administration created the SAVE Plan to provide meaningful financial relief to borrowers and help ease their transition back to repayment. More than 4 million borrowers are already enrolled and tens of millions more, including educators, are eligible. The SAVE Plan is crucial for educators and other public sector workers, because being enrolled in an IDR is an essential requirement for those seeking Public Service Loan Forgiveness.
The SAVE Plan targets benefits to low- and moderate-income borrowers by lowering their monthly loan payments and protecting more of their income--up to 225 percent of the federal poverty level--to enable them to better cover basic needs such as food, housing, and child care. It also ensures that borrowers never see their balance grow as long as they keep up with their required payments. The White House estimates this change will mean that 85 percent of community college borrowers will be debt-free within 10 years. That would not only improve the lives and financial future of the borrowers themselves; it has the potential to change the trajectory for their entire families.
Most Americans--even those without student loans-- understand the severity of the student debt crisis and how it affects those they love. Please vote NO on H.J. Res. 88 and support the administration's efforts to protect millions of current and future borrowers from financial harm. Sincerely, Marc Egan, Director of Government Relations, National Education Association.
Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that in the gentleman from Texas' district, there are over 8,000 borrowers already enrolled in the SAVE Plan. They are already saving money, and the passage of this resolution would increase their monthly payments.
Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that in the gentleman from Texas' district, over 6,600 borrowers have already enrolled in the SAVE Plan. They are already saving money, and the passage of this legislation would significantly increase their payments.
Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, my Republican colleagues clamored and complained about President Biden's plan to provide debt relief for millions of borrowers. Now, House Republicans are trying to saddle millions of Americans and future borrowers with more debt by repealing the SAVE Plan, which has already significantly lowered monthly payments for many low- and middle-income borrowers.
Repealing the SAVE Plan would cause significant disruption, but that seems to be the theme for my colleagues in this Congress.
Mr. Speaker, it is imperative and important to know how we got into the student loan crisis. It was created because the buying power of the Pell grant has fallen dramatically over the years. Originally, it covered about 80 percent of the cost of the tuition, room and board at a State college. Now, it covers less than 30 percent. All of that cost has been shifted over to the students.
The people who are debating today went to college when the Pell grant covered 80 percent, and you didn't have to take out a student loan. Now that we have shifted the cost to students, that is where the student loan problem comes from.
The States are supporting a significantly lower portion, covering a lower portion of the cost of the college--again, putting more of the burden on students.
We should be covering more of a percentage for students, and this is one of the ways to do that. By helping them pay their student loans, we can help pay their way through college.
We should pass proposals to make college more affordable for current and future students, not less. That is what the Biden administration has been doing.
We have heard complaints about the shift of this burden onto the taxpayer. I will tell you that we didn't hear any of that during the debate on the PPP loans, where businessmen got millions of dollars of PPP loans with handshakes and everything else and didn't have to pay them back. We didn't hear any complaints about that, about the people who didn't own businesses. Yet, when a student tries to get an education, all of a sudden, we can't help them pay their loans.
We should be passing proposals to make college more affordable for these students and future students, yet here we are, wasting our time with passing this resolution. Everybody knows this isn't going anywhere.
In fact, the Senate last month took up a similar proposal, and it didn't pass. Whatever happens here, it is not going to pass the Senate, and the President is going to veto it anyway.
Again, the bottom line is that we are responsible for strengthening the support for those seeking a college degree, not because everybody should be forced to get one but because those who want a college education and to move up in life should be able to have access to that opportunity, not just the privileged few that can write the $50,000 a year checks.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.J. Res. 88, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source