Student Loan Sunshine Act

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 890) to establish requirements for lenders and institutions of higher education in order to protect students and other borrowers receiving educational loans, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to insert materials relevant to H.R. 890 into the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, H.R. 890, the Student Loan Sunshine Act of 2007. I offer this legislation along with Mr. McKeon, the senior Republican on the Education and Labor Committee; and Mr. Hinojosa, the subcommittee Chair of the Higher Education Subcommittee on the Education and Labor Committee.

This legislation would protect students and families from the corrupt practices and abuses that for too long have been allowed to run rampant within the student loan industry.

Ensuring that our Nation's student loan programs are working as effectively as possible to help students and parents pay for the cost of a college education, it is paramount to the goals of this Nation recognizing the importance of students' achieving a college education so they can fully participate in American society and the American economy. And working to make that more accessible and affordable has been the long-term goal of both parties of this government.

But now what we see is that this program has been badly corrupted. This program has started to be hollowed out by the activities of lenders, of universities, of individuals within the government, individuals within the university system, individuals within the lending community. For 6 years this administration has been put on notice of these activities taking place in the student lending program with ever-mounting evidence and public statements and concerns echoed by members within the administration from the previous administration calling to the problems that were occurring within the student loan programs. It is becoming increasingly clear that the student loan program has been hijacked by third parties who saw that they could run this program to their financial benefit. Unfortunately, that meant that it was being run to the detriment of the students and the families who are borrowing the money who are struggling to pay this money back so that they could achieve a college education.

We introduced this legislation first in February when it was disclosed by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo that he was expanding an investigation into the relationships between lenders and colleges and universities across the country.

Throughout the previous years, stories have surfaced about inducements and kickbacks and conflicts of interests, bribes and payoffs ranging from sending college employees on exotic vacations to staffing school financial aid offices during the busiest time of the student aid calendar. These inducements are offered by lenders to secure a spot on the preferred lender list, a list that supposedly presents to the students and to their families that this is a list of trust, that these are the best loans available for a number of reasons to those students. But we now learn that securing a position on a preferred lender list was really, in many instances with many universities and with many lenders, an act of corruption, not an act of transparency, not an act of honesty, not an act in the best interest of the students and/or their parents, and not in the best interest of achieving the lowest possible cost for those students' education.

But entry into the preferred lender meant more than just having this coveted spot. It meant a near guarantee of business. It meant an opportunity for lenders to prey on families and offer them private loans. It also meant that students weren't given the best information, the most accurate information. It also meant increased cost to the students and to their families.

Since we first introduced this bill, ongoing investigations at the Federal and State levels and by news organizations have shed new light on the scope of the corruption and the conflicts of interest surrounding these lists that are undermining the Federal student loan aid program that millions of borrowers have come to depend upon. We have learned more about the astonishing degree to which lenders buy their way into colleges and universities through excessive inducements, which is the polite word, or what might be termed ``bribery,'' which might be a better word, in order to boost their marginal profits.

All of this, all of this was known to the Department of Education. Suggested changes were left behind by the Clinton administration to this program. Department employees raised these concerns and others with the Department of Education, and no action was, in fact, taken. And what we see, of course, is that less protection was provided to students and to their families.

We have learned that these inducements include college officials being paid to serve on lender advisory boards and receiving stock in the companies. We have learned that these conflicts of interest do not end with college financial aid officers. It has been revealed that at least one public official in the Office of Federal Student Aid, the arm of the Department of Education that runs the student aid program, held hundreds of thousands of dollars of stock in a major student loan company.

But this is just the tip of the iceberg. Lenders and schools must be held accountable for any practice that compromises the trust that students and parents deserve to have in our Federal student aid program. Today, by passing the Student Aid Sunshine Act, we are taking clear and important actions to put an end to the corrupt practices and conflicts of interest that for too long have been allowed to dominate this industry.

We call on lenders, institutions and the Department of Education to also take appropriate action to end these practices, and we insist that they recognize their fiduciary responsibility to the students and their parents who are the borrowers of this money, the borrowing of money that they struggle to pay back for many years afterwards.

I am proud to be joined by my colleagues on the Education and Labor Committee, Buck McKeon, the senior Republican, and, again, Ruben Hinojosa of the Subcommittee on Higher Education to bring to the floor a stronger, more comprehensive, bipartisan Student Loan Sunshine Act. This bill will prevent these egregious practices from occurring in the future by reinstating trust in our schools through strict codes of conduct, guaranteeing loan options and ensuring the best loan possible, ensuring equal and timely processing of loans, giving students full and fair information when taking out and repaying loans, protecting students from aggressive marketing practices and inserting the fiduciary responsibility for all parties to these agreements.

Further, this bill bans all gifts, participation on advisory boards and risk-sharing agreements between lenders and schools and ensures greater transparency and accountability when schools recommend lenders for the students.

I urge all of my colleagues to join us in voting for this legislation. Today, I think we can take this critical step toward returning these programs to the very people they were intended to serve, students and parents who are borrowing this money. It's time to protect these students and parents and end the exploitation and the abuses of the student loan program.

Again, I want to thank my colleagues on the committee for all their assistance in drafting this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I failed to acknowledge and I want to acknowledge Mr. Keller's help in the drafting of this legislation. He is the senior Democrat on the Higher Education Subcommittee.

I would like to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the Chair of that subcommittee, Mr. Hinojosa.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for his remarks and for his leadership on this. I thank Mr. McKeon and Mr. Keller for all of their cooperation, for their suggestions and for the introduction of the bill soon after this came to light by Mr. McKeon. I think it was very helpful in our discussions with Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. I certainly want to thank him for his diligence and the speed with which he responded to this information.

Tragically, much of this information has been available for a considerable period of time. Tragically, what we now are making against the law, the conduct we are now changing almost became the preferred way of doing business among many of the colleges and universities and the lenders which they utilized on behalf of their students.

It is just inconceivable that when people understand, and it is brought to our attention every day, the decisions that students and their families have to make about whether to pursue a college degree, the costs that are incurred, the sacrifices that are made by working families, by all families, by the students, many of whom then work part time and full time to augment the cost of that college, when that sacrifice and those determinations and decisions are made by those families, to have that process corrupted by some of the largest corporations in America, some of the wealthiest corporations in America, that they would see somehow a way to skim off, to skim off the profits and the costs at the expense of these students and of the taxpayers that put up the money.

The reason we guarantee these loans is to try to drive this money to the students and their families at the lowest possible cost so that they can afford to go to college; they can afford to take a job and pay back the cost of their college. That is the public purpose. Now that public purpose has absolutely been prostituted by the Department of Education, by many of the lending institutions and by many of the colleges and much of the personnel that works for them.

This legislation is a first step, a bipartisan step to stop those practices in their tracks, to get this program right side up for the benefit of the families and the students who are borrowing the money. To serve notice on the institutions, the lenders, the institutions of higher education and the people who work in these programs that this will no longer be tolerated.

Once again, this program has to come to the point where it is again serving the families and the students who are making this sacrifice to achieve a college education at the lowest possible cost. That is the public interest, that is the public purpose, and we will not have that corrupted. We will not have that corrupted, either by the public agencies or the private agencies that are engaged in this program.

The next step is to bar those agencies if they continue in this practice. That would be a horrible thing to do for those institutions, but we will not allow this to continue. And as we consider the Higher Education Act, we are going to continue to pursue ways in which we can reform this program and make it work for those for whom it was designed, the families and the students.

I want to thank the staff on both sides of the committee that were so helpful in understanding the programs and the changes that needed to be made, that went through the evidence and responded in this legislation, so that the House of Representatives could go on record that we will not allow this to happen on our watch.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the House to pass H.R. 890, as amended, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 382 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 382 provides for consideration of H.R. 1684, the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, under a structured rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

The rule waives all points of order against the bill's consideration, except those arising under clauses 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The rule makes in order and provides appropriate waivers for 21 amendments.

I am pleased to stand before you today with a rule to permit the Homeland Security authorization bill to come to the House floor.

First and foremost, I want to thank Chairman Thompson for his continued leadership on an issue of utmost importance for the safety and prosperity of this country and for working so closely with Ranking Member King on this bill.

This bipartisan bill authorizes $39.8 billion to the Homeland Security to carry out its many functions, from securing our borders to providing our local law enforcement with resources to prepare for and prevent terrorist attacks.

The Department of Homeland Security has a wide range of responsibilities. In recognition of this critical mission, I am pleased that the Homeland Security Committee has authorized $2.1 billion more than the President requested in his budget. This authorization bill does far more than simply authorize appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security.

This bill gets at the heart of the management problems within the Department. As we all know, the Department was created by combining the work of 22 separate agencies. This process of integration has had many, many challenges, poor communication between agencies, a lack of qualified management, unusually high turnover of senior personnel.

Congress has not made these challenges any easier, however. We could have addressed some of these problems through the legislative process by passing an authorization bill last year, but the prior majority failed to do so, and so the Department's management problems went uncorrected.

Without addressing the underlying management and operational issues, the Department cannot perform its important functions. In such an environment, how can the American people feel safe?

Thankfully, H.R. 1684 addresses these challenges. It mandates a comprehensive review of the Department at the beginning of each new administration in order to ensure that DHS is structured to meet the security needs of the American people. It sets qualifications for senior managers, increases coordination between agencies, and boosts funds for the Inspector General. And, agency by agency, it puts in place thoughtful personnel policies to attract, train and keep only the most qualified personnel.

These reforms are important, and I'm glad that the committee and the Democratic leadership have moved forward with a well-focused bill to improve the Department's management.

This bill continues the majority's strong record on homeland security. In a few short months, this Congress has passed bills to implement the 9/11 recommendations and to strengthen rail and public transportation security, each with strong bipartisan majorities. Each is a component of a comprehensive approach to protecting our constituents from potential threats.

I applaud the committee and the leadership for their consistent focus on homeland security. I understand that some Members have concerns that this bill does not address every issue, but part of the legislative process is working through these issues through the committees of jurisdiction.

It is important to keep in mind that Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member King put forth a bipartisan bill during markup, and Chairman Thompson continues to work with other committees of jurisdiction in order to make sure that every aspect of our Nation's security is supported by Congress.

In particular, I applaud the chairman's record of shepherding 2 major homeland security bills through the House already. I think we should all agree that today's effort, the third homeland security bill in 4 months, makes substantial improvements to long-standing management issues within DHS. The rule and underlying bill shows a commitment of this Congress to working for a safe and secure America.

So I urge all Members to support both the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi, chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, Mr. Thompson.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me emphasize to all Members that this bill is working its way through the legislative process. It is true that as a fair and responsible chairman, Mr. Thompson worked with several other committees of jurisdiction on this measure. As the manager's amendment clarifies, in some cases, the Homeland Security Committee proceeded with its language, and in others, it permitted other committees to lend their expertise to the issue in the coming months. This is the process of governing.

It is also true that the prior majority chose not to engage in this most basic of functions last year. They didn't bring an authorization bill to the floor, and by not engaging in this hard work, the prior majority let known problems go unresolved.

This bill brings overdue reform and accountability to the Department in its earliest Homeland Security authorization bill ever. That is responsible. That is governing.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I that consume.

Let me emphasize to Members the history on this issue. Unlike the prior majority, this majority is committed to passing a Homeland Security authorization into law.

In 2005, 2 years ago, the House passed an authorization after the appropriations bill passed. Last year, 2006, the House did not bother to bring a bill to the floor. That is irresponsible in light of the Department's many problems.

Democrats are committed to governing responsibly, and this is one step along that path.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to clarify, this bill eliminates the cuts in vital first responders programs, like the 55 percent cuts that the administration asked for in firefighter assistance grants. It preserves the Local Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program that the administration wanted

to close. And on contracting oversight management and personnel policies, it brings overdue reform to a Department in need. This is a good bill, and all Members should support it.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to once again thank Chairman Thompson for his leadership in drafting a well-focused Homeland Security authorization and for working so closely with Ranking Member King on this bill.

I would note for all Members that Chairman Thompson worked with other chairmen and ranking members. The jurisdiction issues were raised by both sides, Republican and Democrat. I would also note that the manager's amendment which deals with these changes will receive separate debate and a vote. This is an open process.

Unlike the prior majority, we work through these issues. Again, last year when these problems were raised, the prior majority chose not to act. In contrast, we are acting despite these difficulties. We are being responsible.

H.R. 1684 will help improve the policy-making at the Department of Homeland Security, will promote long-term planning and will strengthen management. In particular, it sets qualifications for senior managers, increases coordination between agencies, and boosts funds for the Inspector General. These changes will ensure that the Department of Homeland Security can perform its important function of protecting the American people.

I am pleased that the Democratic leadership has moved swiftly and brought a Homeland Security authorization bill to the floor. This is the first time in 2 years such a bill has come to the floor.

It is also the earliest that a Department of Homeland Security authorization bill has come to the floor and the first time it has occurred before appropriators have marked up the Homeland Security appropriations bill. This is truly significant, and I thank the leadership for their commitment to protecting America.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation and thank Chairman Miller and Chairman Hinojosa, Ranking Member Keller, and their staffs and my staff for striking a bipartisan accord to advance this bill.

I have often said that in order to begin reaffirming trust in our student aid system all stakeholders must step up. That means lenders, colleges, the Education Department, States and Congress all have a role to play.

Within the past few weeks, Secretary of Education Spellings established an internal task force to review her Department's oversight of Federal student loan programs; and, today, the U.S. House is stepping up as well. It is an important step, to be sure. We are stepping up today for a single, fundamental reason, to ensure our Nation's financial aid system continues to serve the need of the students who depend on it for the opportunity to get an education.

This isn't about us versus the lenders or us versus the financial aid officers, and this isn't about direct loans versus the market-based FFEL program. And, for the record, I continue to strongly support FFEL and a healthy competition between the two Federal programs. This is about protecting the interests of millions of young men and women who expect our student aid system to be there for them when they need it.

Several weeks ago, my Education and Labor Committee colleague, Mr. Keller, and I introduced comprehensive legislation to begin the process of reaffirming our trust in the financial aid system. I am proud that our bill served as an impetus for bringing the measure before us to the House floor.

Our legislation built on many of the financial aid reform recommendations Chairman Miller made earlier this year, and I am pleased that what we are poised to advance today reflects a broad agreement to set these important reforms into motion.

Like my bill and Chairman Miller's bill, the bipartisan agreement we will vote on today does not explicitly outlaw the practice of preferred lender lists. Rather, it reforms this practice to ensure that it continues to serve the interests of our students. Like my bill and Chairman Miller's bill, the bipartisan agreement we will vote on today aims to protect against conflicts of interest between lenders and financial aid officers. And like my bill and Chairman Miller's bill, the bipartisan agreement we will vote on today allows lenders to seek advice from institutions in order to improve products and services for students.

However, the measure Mr. Keller and I introduced went even further than past recommendations, and I am pleased the agreement we will vote on today incorporates our important modifications. For example, just as in the bill I authored with Mr. Keller, the measure before us asks colleges to develop their own unique codes of conduct that must include restrictions on anything else that may give the appearance of a conflict of interest between financial aid officers and lenders. And just as in the bill I authored with Mr. Keller, the measure before us bans revenue sharing between lenders of private loans and colleges or universities.

Mr. Speaker, the FFEL and other financial aid programs successfully serve millions of students and their families every year, and this bill makes our system even better. As we move forward from here, we must not lose sight of the fact that the Federal financial aid system must work for students and colleges alike. We must be careful not to overreach, as Congress does all too often, but we do need to reaffirm our trust in the system. I believe this bill does just that.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield now 4 minutes to the ranking member Republican on the Higher Education Subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close the debate.

Mr. Speaker, what our job is here in Washington as legislators is to represent the people from our districts, the people from around the country. Specifically on the Committee on Education, we have the responsibility to protect and encourage those young people who are trying to receive an education, both K-12 level and those who want to continue their education throughout their lifetime at the higher education level.

We have passed many laws that try to make it easier for people to achieve the American Dream through education. Sometimes we have people that skirt those laws or take them up to the edge. When we find problems, it is our responsibility to address those problems.

We have about 6,000 schools across the country that participate in the Federal financial aid programs. They have financial aid officers that work with the students that come into the schools to help them get a Pell Grant or get other financial aid that is available, or they help them find a loan company that will help them get a loan that is needed to achieve their education.

We have about 3,500 lenders that participate in these loans. Again, some of the lenders have crossed the line or gotten too close to the line, as with some of the financial aid officers, but we definitely don't want to paint all lenders, all schools, all financial aid officers, with a broad brush, saying they are all corrupt. Most of them, the vast percentage of them, are doing a great job of trying to carry out their mission and helping students achieve their goals.

This piece of legislation will help make that law stronger, to verify that those students will get the most help in getting the loans and getting the financial aid they need to achieve the American Dream, and I am happy to be a part of this, to make it come to pass. I am hopeful that the other body will pick up this legislation and move forward with it. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this law.

Mr. Speaker, I thank, again, Chairman Miller for being expeditious on this and getting this bill to the floor quickly.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that both sides be allocated an additional 1\1/2\ minutes in order to allow Mr. Castle, the ranking member, who has just arrived, to speak on the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).

(Mr. CASTLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), for the time; and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The security of the American people, Mr. Speaker, is the primary function of the government of the United States. Since September 11, 2001, we have been working to rebuild our Nation, not only our buildings but also our sense of security. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security to coordinate all domestic security activities on behalf of the American people was an important first step and has served as the foundation of our continuing efforts to protect our citizens.

Today, we consider the third authorization for the Department of Homeland Security. During consideration of this underlying legislation, Members from both sides of the aisle worked together to craft a bipartisan bill. The

bill sought to build a core capacity at the Department and bring about targeted personnel, contracting and policy changes. That bill passed the Homeland Security Committee unanimously.

But even though the bill passed out of the committee with unanimous support, the majority party is attempting to undo the bipartisan bill by coming forth with a manager's amendment that significantly alters the makeup of that bill. The manager's amendment strikes key provisions which address high-priority homeland security issues. Out of a total of 86 substantive bill provisions, 26, or almost a third, are amended by the manager's amendment and 16, 20 percent almost, are entirely struck.

Most of the provisions stricken by the manager's amendment had become part of the bill through Republican amendments in the committee process. For example, the manager's amendment strikes provisions on the Student and Exchange Visitor Program and eligible uses of interoperability grants, among others.

There are two provisions that the manager's amendment deletes that I think should be highlighted, Mr. Speaker. The first would strike post- employment lobbying restrictions. This provision being eliminated from the bill by the manager's amendment would codify the existing ban on senior Department of Homeland Security employees from one part of the Department lobbying other parts of the Department within 1 year of leaving the Department. That reform is stricken from the bill by the manager's amendment.

The second part of the bill being stricken is a sense of the Congress calling for implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendation to establish a single point of oversight of homeland security in the House of Representatives and in the Senate.

Now, that is one of the key recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, and precisely it is one that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle ran on in the elections, the promise to enact the 9/11 Commission recommendations.

Yet here they have an opportunity to follow through on their campaign promise, but, instead, they strike the provision from the bill through the manager's amendment. And they don't even allow for the provision to be debated in the form of an amendment on the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I was pleased that the Castor amendment, which helps address concerns with the dual implementation of the Florida Uniform Port Access Credential and the Transportation Workers Identification Card, was made in order. But there was another glaring missed opportunity here by the majority on the Rules Committee.

The Rules Committee had the opportunity to allow an open rule on this bill, but the suggestion that we do so, that we come forth with an open rule, was voted down by the majority on the Rules Committee. Instead, they decided to report out a restrictive rule, thereby shutting out Members who had worked diligently to prepare their amendments. They also blocked out any Member who may be watching the debate now or in the process of the developing, unfolding debate and has an idea to improve the bill. No, no, they're blocked out as well. They're shut out.

It's unfortunate that the Rules Committee missed another opportunity to open the debate on this important legislation, as they promised during the campaign that they would; and because of that and the reasons that I have brought out, Mr. Speaker, this rule should be defeated.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security, Mr. King.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, it is my privilege to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished leader from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Reichert).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, it is my pleasure to yield 4\1/2\ minutes to a distinguished colleague from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).

(Mr. PRICE of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I will be asking for a ``no'' vote on the previous question so that I can amend this restrictive rule to make in order the amendment offered by Representative Hayes of North Carolina which would strike section 407 of the bill, the section requiring DHS to buy American textiles and apparel, protective gear, badges and ID cards. The amendment would instead require that DHS buy items specified in the amendment only when those items are connected to national security functions within the Department. This amendment also includes language to ensure that these provisions comply with the World Trade Organization rules.

Mr. Speaker, this thoughtful amendment submitted by Mr. Hayes was unfortunately denied yesterday at the Rules Committee. If the previous question is defeated, the Hayes amendment would be made in order and the House would be able to have a full discussion on its merits.

I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1051) to direct the Secretary of Education to establish and maintain a public website through which individuals may find a complete database of available scholarships, fellowships, and other programs of financial assistance in the study of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I request that there be 5 legislative days during which Members may insert material relevant to H.R. 1050 into the Record, and I ask unanimous consent that Members be allowed to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I will be brief. This is an important piece of all of the work that we have to do to improve our science, engineering, technology and mathematics capability here in the United States. Specifically, this bill establishes a complete database of all available scholarships from public and private sources, fellowships, and other programs of financial assistance for the study of science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

The Act, specifically known as the National STEM Scholarship Database Act, directs the Secretary of Education to establish and maintain a public Web site through which individuals may find a complete database of available scholarships, fellowships and financial assistance.

The Secretary of Education will also, under this legislation, disseminate information about the database to secondary schools and to colleges and universities, institutions of higher education. It will serve as a one-stop shop for financial aid information for those who want to study in the STEM fields.

Now, it may be surprising to my colleagues that this doesn't already exist. But it does not. Although there are many things that we need to do to improve science and math teaching in elementary and secondary schools and in higher education, and encourage students toward science and technology fields, this is one important thing we can accomplish today.

We all know that higher education is expensive. In fact, many students are deterred from studying these important fields because of the cost.

Yet, at the same time, some of the opportunities for financial assistance go unused, and, students, however motivated they may be, often don't know where to start to look for financial assistance. Certainly in high school, school counselors are overloaded with typically 400 students each, and as a college student is trying to decide on a major and a specific field of engineering, for example, it's hard to know where to turn for financial assistance.

This simple straightforward database available through a Web site will greatly, I think, facilitate the student's ability to go into these STEM fields. It will serve all students at all levels as they are thinking about going into college, as they are thinking about choosing a major in college, as they are thinking about going to graduate school, as they are thinking about whether or not to teach in a science or engineering or mathematics area.

This is an important and straightforward piece of legislation that will assist our nation's students in studying science and math, and will assist our country in our efforts to be more competitive internationally.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Price, who is an original cosponsor of this legislation, along with many others from the Education Committee, from the Science Committee, and from elsewhere here in Congress.

And, with that, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, my colleague on the committee on Education and Labor, Mr. Hinojosa.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for his support and also for pointing out that this has nothing to do with pleuropotent stem cells but has to do with what is generally known as STEM education, science, technology, engineering and mathematics education.

Mr. Speaker, I'm now pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois, my colleague on the Education Committee, Mr. Hare, who understands that financial assistance is necessary for nearly two- thirds of undergraduates and most graduate students, and anything we can do to help them take advantage of available financial aid will improve their lives and our society. Mr. Hare.

Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York, my colleague on the Committee on Education and Labor (Mrs. McCarthy), who also understands the importance of this legislation to individual students as well as to our economy at large.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

As I said earlier, it may come as a surprise to my colleagues that this single database where any student who might be interested in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics could go might, they might be surprised that it doesn't already exist. In fact, it doesn't.

This is straightforward legislation that will make it easier for students to pursue a line of study or one of a number of lines of study that are critically important not only for their personal development, but for our economy and our society, our international competitiveness, indeed, the future of our country.

This is only one piece of the many things that we need to do that you have heard from other speakers about this morning. It is a straightforward, simple thing that we can do, that is not expensive. If we could, through this inexpensive method, encourage eight or ten or twelve more students to go into science, that would be wonderful. Instead, I expect we will get hundreds, if not thousands, who will find their way into these critical fields because of the existence of a database that gives them a place to start as they look to their future.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of H.R. 1051, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.