Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1338) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide more effective remedies to victims of discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1389, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 4137) to amend and extend the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the conference report on H.R. 4137, which strengthens and reauthorizes the Higher Education Act. In America, a college degree has always been the ticket to middle class. More and more, our future depends upon our ability to produce well-educated and skilled workers to take the jobs of the 21st century.

Over the past 2 years, this Congress has built a strong record of working in a bipartisan way to make college more affordable and accessible. Last year we enacted the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, which provides for the single largest increase in Federal student aid since the GI Bill.

But we also know that there is still work to do to ensure that the doors of college are truly open to all qualified students who want to attend. The last time the Higher Education Act was authorized was 1998. In those 10 years that have passed, our world and our country have changed, and so have the needs of college-going students.

Today's students face a number of challenges on their path to college, from skyrocketing college tuition prices, to needlessly complicated student aid and application processes, to the predatory tactics of student lenders. This conference report will remove these obstacles and reshape our higher education programs in the best interests of students and families.

To address soaring costs, this legislation will increase the transparency and the accountability of the tuition pricing system, shining a bright light on the prices set by colleges and universities. It requires the Department of Education to create new, user friendly Web sites with helpful information on college prices and the factors that are driving these tuition increases. Colleges with the largest increases in tuition will be required to report their reasons for raising those prices.

This bill will also ensure that States hold up their end of the bargain in

funding higher education by establishing for the first time a maintenance-of-effort requirement on the States that receive Federal funds through the student loan program. This means while we are putting in money from the top from the Federal Government, the States will hopefully stop taking that money out of the bottom and leaving families and students who are borrowing loans to go to college no better off than they were before these actions. This is a dramatic change from the patterns of the past.

To better protect students while navigating the often murky world of college loans, this bill restores trust and accountability to the student loan programs by cleaning up the conflicts of interest between the lenders and the colleges. All Federal and private student lenders will be required to provide full and fair disclosure about the terms and conditions of the loans they offer. And to help borrowers' reliance on more expensive private loans, we will help ensure that students and families first exhaust the less expensive Federal loan and aid options before turning to private loans.

It will also help students manage their textbook costs. It provides students and faculties with complete pricing information before each semester so they can shop around for the most affordable deals. For the first time, textbook publishers will be required to offer less expensive versions of each expensive bundled textbook they sell.

This bicameral compromise also simplifies the Federal student aid application process and provides families with early estimates of their expected financial aid packages to help them better plan for their expenses a year ahead of the time.

In addition, H.R. 4137 will make Pell Grant scholarships available year-round for the first time.

It strengthens the TRIO and the GEAR UP college readiness and support programs that are critical to helping so many students stay in school and graduate.

It expands funding for graduate programs at historically Black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, and predominantly Black institutions.

It increases college aid and support programs for veterans and military families.

It ensures equal college opportunities and fair learning environments for students with disabilities.

It makes colleges safer for the entire campus community.

It encourages colleges and universities to adopt energy efficient and sustainable practices on their campuses.

I am confident that this legislation will improve the higher education system and make it more affordable, fairer and easier to navigate for students and families. Almost all of these students are borrowing money. Time is money, and time is effort, and we need to make this process more streamlined, fairer to families and fairer to students.

None of this, I want to say, would be possible without the leadership and the passion and the determination of Senator Ted Kennedy, and I would like to thank him for that.

Also, Senator Enzi and Senator Mikulski. Senator Mikulski stepped in when Senator Kennedy became ill and did a magnificent job of shepherding this bill and this conference report through the Senate.

I would also like to thank all the members of our committee for their hard work. And I would especially like to recognize Congressmen Buck McKeon, Ruben Hinojosa, and Ric Keller, and their staffs including Amy Raaf Jones, Moira Lenehan, and Ricardo Martinez.

And, finally, I would like to thank my staff for their tireless efforts on this reauthorization, including Mark Zuckerman, Alex Nock, Denise Forte, Stephanie Moore, Gaby Gomez, Julie Radocchia, Jeff Appel, Sharon Lewis, Margaret Young, Fred Jones, and Arman Rezaee.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa), the Subcommittee on Higher Education Chair, who has done a magnificent job in shepherding this bill to the floor.

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

I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) for a unanimous consent request.

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

I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Davis).

I would just like to thank the gentlewoman for all of her work on behalf of military families, making sure that they did not pay an additional price for being in the military and lose their eligibility, for her work on that amendment.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) who has been so helpful on this legislation, both in teacher education and in community service and the work study programs.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), who has been so helpful on this legislation with respect to Historically Black Colleges and Universities and the TRIO program.

(Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

If the gentleman would yield, I would be happy to engage in a colloquy with the gentleman from Illinois about section 725.

I concur completely with the gentleman's understanding. The conferees intend that this reauthorization is to strengthen the ability of both the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Predominantly Black Institutions to develop masters professionals. For this reason, the conferees intend that any appropriated funds be divided proportionately between the sections 723 and 724.

I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) who, again, was so helpful in the business partnership agreements.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) who's been a champion on campus safety during this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) who did groundbreaking work and made such an effort to make sure the States meet the responsibility for financing public higher education.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and thank him for all of his work on the foreign language partnerships and the creation of the deputy assistant secretary.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire) and thank him for his work on the business workforce partnerships and on the textbook rental program.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Yarmuth) and thank him for his work on the Teach to Reach grants and the students success grants for community college students.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and I want to thank him for his work on the cohort default rate and on the year-round Pell Grant.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) and thank her for all her work on the TRIO program. It is so important to get kids to college and to stay in college.

How much time is remaining, might I inquire of the Chair.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hare), and I want to thank him for his work on dislocated workers and on the rural communities.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and thank him for all of his work on the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and on the modeling and simulation program.

Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, families across America and students everywhere, it is a pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois, who revolutionized and changed and simplified the student loan application form for all of America's families and students from this day forward, Mr. Emanuel.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), and I want to thank him for his work on the sustainability program and creating a summit on sustainability in colleges and universities.

I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) and thank him for his work on the real-time writers program.

May I inquire of the Speaker as to the time remaining.

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

Mr. Speaker, and members of the committee, I'm very proud of this legislation. I'm very proud of the members of my committee on both sides of the aisle. This legislation doesn't just belong to this committee at this time or to the majority party just at this time, this legislation has been worked on by many people on both sides of the aisle.

When the Republicans were in the majority and Mr. McKeon was the subcommittee chair, he pushed hard for this legislation. And Mr. Kildee has spent many years on our committee working on behalf of higher education. And Mr. Hinojosa authored legislation, along with Mr. McKeon, that made it through the House in the last session.

Why has that been true? Why is this legislation so broadly supported? Because we all understand the importance of a well-educated American population, and we all understand the urgency of this moment. At no time in our history has America needed a better educated population than it needs today.

And we understand the importance of a college education and what it means to America's families, what it means to young people as they start out in their careers, as they start out their families, and their ability to provide for themselves and go to jobs that are interesting, that work for them, that make sense for them, and yet be able to have the skills so they can continue in the American economic system. This legislation does all of those things.

This legislation helps to make college more affordable. It certainly helps to make it more accessible. And it has done that because of the agreements that we have reached on both sides of the aisle. Mr. McKeon has pushed long and hard for increases in the Pell Grants, long and hard for accountability in this system, and long and hard to make sure that the cost of college, that we have greater transparency, that we understand it better, that parents would be able to decipher, that students would be able to decipher and understand it. This legislation improves this act with respect to all of those provisions of the law.

I tried to recognize the contributions made by each Member on our side of the aisle and the programs that they worked on to increase access to college for so many populations that haven't been given the full opportunity in the past that will be able to take advantage of that opportunity.

And finally, this legislation makes it more affordable for many students. It's in combination with what we did in the reconciliation bill, where we provided $20 billion in new resources for students by cutting the interest rates, by providing forgiveness for loans, by increasing the Pell Grants, and providing real-time tuition assistance for those who want to go into teaching.

This is an important piece of legislation; it's important to the Congress, it's important to our Nation, it's important to families and students who struggle mightily to figure out how they can finance an education.

I think this is a big step in assuring that every qualified student should be able to afford college. They may have to borrow some money, but it's well worth that if they can achieve a college education. And I think it's going to make a major contribution to strengthening the American economy.

This is a moment in time legislation and authorization of the Higher Education Act. But for over 45 years, there has been a fixed star in increasing the opportunity for young people to go to college and increasing the wherewithal for families and students to afford a college education, and that was the Senator from Massachusetts, who, unfortunately, is not able to be with us as we pass this conference report today in the House and in the Senate, but he is with us in great spirit. He called the other day to congratulate us with great enthusiasm. He wasn't convinced we were actually going to get it done, and he said he was quite excited that we did. And he was looking forward to the passage of this legislation.

He has been a moving force for opportunity at all levels of society. But he, first and foremost, has understood the opportunity that education provides. Whether it's early childhood education, preschool education, elementary, secondary education, community colleges, 4-year colleges, graduate schools, Senator Ted Kennedy has been a champion of making sure that those doors are open to everybody in this society. And this legislation, I think, honors that commitment that Senator Kennedy has had for so many years as he has continued to sit on the Education Committee in the United States Senate and pound out this legislation that is so important to America's families, to America's students, and to America's economy.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation. I thanked them earlier, but I want to thank all the members of the committee on both sides of the aisle. I want to thank Mr. McKeon for his leadership on this issue, and certainly to all of the staff for their help. And happy birthday to Joe Novotny.

Mr. Speaker, 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 1388 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, a member of the Rules Committee, Mr. Diaz-Balart. All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1388.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1388 provides for consideration of H.R. 1338, the Paycheck Fairness Act, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate controlled by the Committee on Education and Labor. The rule makes in order six amendments which are printed in the Rules Committee report, and the rule also provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, our great Nation recently celebrated the 160th anniversary of the 1848 Women's Rights Convention in Seneca Falls, New York. This groundbreaking convention was dedicated to the key principle in the Declaration of Independence that we are all created equal. Women have had a hard time to recognize that because it took more than 70 years for us to pass legislation giving women the right to vote.

But in the years since Seneca Falls, generations of courageous women have made great strides towards equality. From securing a woman's right to vote in 1920 to serving our country in World War II, American women have come a long way. In this Congress alone, we have much to celebrate. Speaker Pelosi is the first woman to lead this esteemed body. And Senator Clinton made ``18 million cracks'' in the Nation's highest glass ceiling as the first woman to run a formidable Presidential campaign.

Yet as we celebrate these important milestones and look back on all we

have achieved since 1848, we know full well that our journey toward gender equality is not complete. Despite the strong leadership of several generations of women, we are still struggling to achieve equality in the workplace. Among the most distressing disparities is the significant gap in pay between American men and women as they work side by side doing the very same work.

Mr. Speaker, 45 years ago President John F. Kennedy signed into law the Equal Pay Act to address the unconscionable practice of paying women less for the same job. That was 45 years ago and we still struggle. At that time when this bill was signed, women were earning 59 cents for each dollar earned by a man in a comparable job. While the wage gap has narrowed, today the working women in America still earn only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. In other words, let me put it this way, 18 cents more has been achieved in the past 45 years.

According to the Department of Labor, which maintains data on over 300 job classifications, men are paid more in each and every category. This is so important, I'm going to say it again. The Department of Labor says in 300 job classifications, men are paid more in each and every 1 of them. Even in what they call the female-dominated industries where women comprise 70 percent of that labor force, women earn 20 percent less than their male coworkers.

Experts estimate that the average woman worker will lose anywhere from $200,000 to $2 million over her lifetime as a result of the wage gap. Over time women earn significantly less than men, and lower wages translate into less income that counts in calculating pensions and in some cases Social Security benefits. Closing the wage gap will have a long-term impact on the women's economic security, especially in retirement.

To all the cynics who dismiss equal pay as just another women's issue, I want to point out that the wage gap not only hurts women, it hurts families. It hurts children being raised by single moms who have to work two jobs to make ends meet when one might suffice were she to be paid equally with her male coworkers. It hurts families with two working parents who are struggling as one partner makes 20 percent less than her male colleagues. Currently, single women who are heads of households are twice as likely to be in poverty as single fathers. Again, currently single women who are heads of households are twice as likely to be in poverty as single fathers. That is a fact that we must face here and remedy. And we know that pay equity for women is closely linked to eradicating poverty. For families who live below or near the poverty line, the equal pay for women will make a significant difference to the well-being of American families. And after all, Mr. Speaker, isn't that why we are here?

Despite these statistics and shocking data that indicates that men make over 20 percent more than their female colleagues on average, the Supreme Court dealt a blow to working women last year when it decided Ledbetter v. Goodyear. In that case, former Goodyear employee Lilly Ledbetter, an employee of 28 years, sued the company after she left the company after discovering she had been paid significantly less than male employees doing the same job during her nearly two decades of employment. And remember, Mr. Speaker, that the Equal Pay Act of 1963 was in effect at that time. Though Ms. Ledbetter was clearly treated as a second-class employee, although she got wonderful ratings and compliments on her job, the Supreme Court let Goodyear off the hook on what I think is a misrepresentation of the law.

The Supreme Court ruled that in order to enforce her right to be paid fairly, Ms. Ledbetter would have had to file a wage discrimination complaint within 180 days of when the discrimination began. Now, imagine that. You're new on the job. You're happy to be there. You're learning your job. And you have no idea what other people are paid or whether you're being discriminated against. That shows you the grave mistake made by the Supreme Court. But since pay practices typically take place in secret, it would be impossible for a woman to discover discrimination within a 180-day window that she has to file a claim.

Justice Ginsberg, the only woman serving on the Court, wisely noted that the Ledbetter decision essentially gutted legislative protections against discriminatory pay practices. Again, that would have been the law of 1963. In its Ledbetter ruling, the Supreme Court has all but endorsed gender discrimination in employment by robbing women of a legal remedy to enforce equality. One certainly understands that we need more women on the United States Supreme Court.

To overcome these efforts to nullify the Equal Pay Act, we must redouble our efforts to insist that Lilly Ledbetter and the countless hardworking women like her in America are compensated fairly.

Earlier this month I was proud to join Speaker Pelosi, Senator Clinton, Rosa DeLauro, Lilly Ledbetter, and many of my colleagues at an event in support of the Paycheck Fairness Act.

This legislation we are debating today prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who discuss salary information with coworkers. Can you imagine that in most companies that is against the rules? It puts gender-based discrimination sanctions on equal footing with other forms of wage discrimination by allowing women to sue for compensatory and punitive damages, and it will help prevent future pay disparities by requiring the Department of Labor to expand outreach to employers and to continue to collect and share wage information based on gender.

Finally, it creates a grant program to strengthen the negotiation skills of girls and women to help our daughters fight for the compensation to which they are entitled.

Today, we have an historic opportunity to stand up for the women of America and say, You deserve equal pay for equal work. Today, we have an opportunity and an obligation to stand up for our mothers and daughters and sisters and nieces who are making less than their male counterparts for the exact same work.

Today, even though it is late in the day, we have an opportunity to secure the promise of America so that tomorrow our daughters and sons and granddaughters and grandsons will all have equal opportunity to achieve the American dream. Until we do, we will never reach the gender equality that women and men present at the 1848 Women's Rights Convention aspired to achieve.

Mr. Speaker, it is our responsibility to the working women in our lives and to the generations of hardworking women who came before us to support this legislation. It is my sincere hope that this bill will soon become law, and I implore my colleagues to vote for it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from the Rules Committee and also from Florida (Ms. Castor).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to a member of the Rules Committee, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the author of this legislation, an outstanding Member, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

I yield an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch), a valued member of the Rules Committee.

I would like to inform my colleague that I have no further speakers and would reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I feel compelled to explain to the listening persons and those in our galley why we are here today.

The other side has consistently talked as though this is an energy bill, but let me remind all of us that this is an opportunity for the United States to bring into compliance with pay scales, in compliance with the law of 1963 for women who, as my colleague Ms. DeLauro pointed out, comprise 40 percent of the workforce.

This legislation cures a wrong that has cost many women between $400,000 and $2 million, not only in the lost wages they should have been paid had there been equality, but also indirectly their pensions and their Social Security in many cases. This hurts families, Mr. Speaker. This hurts single parents who are trying, oftentimes doing two jobs, to try to keep food on the table.

All the statistics show, which absolutely astonished me, that more women who are single heads of household than men are under the poverty line. One reason for that is they did not get equal pay. We have to right this wrong. We have to do it today. I can't express enough my gratitude for Congresswoman DeLauro and the Women's Caucus for all the work that they have done. But it has been since 1963, 45 years ago, when the law was passed demanding equal pay. And here we are in 2008, Mr. Speaker, and we still don't have it.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote yes on the previous question, yes on the rule, and, by all means, yes on the underlying bill.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 1388 Offered by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 3. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution

the House shall, without intervention of any point of order,

consider in the House the bill (H.R. 6566) to bring down

energy prices by increasing safe, domestic production,

encouraging the development of alternative and renewable

energy, and promoting conservation. All points of order

against the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as

read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on

the bill and any amendment thereto to final passage without

intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill

equally divided and controlled by the majority and minority

leader, and (2) an amendment in the nature of a substitute if

offered by the Majority Leader or his designee, which shall

be considered as read and shall be separately debatable for

40 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent

and an Opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit with or

without instructions.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I support the passage of the conference report.

I commend full Committee Chairman Miller, Subcommittee Chairman Hinojosa, Ranking Members McKeon and Keller for their leadership on this bill. I extend my deepest thanks to the chairman for his commitment to enhancing minority education and for his steadfast support on multiple issues that were especially important to me and to institutions serving the black community.

I would be remiss if I did not thank the Education and Labor staff, who so skillfully worked to establish the many wonderful programs that will improve higher education for so many.

There are multiple provisions of this bill that will benefit Chicago and other places throughout the country. I am especially pleased that the bill strengthens minority-serving institutions, especially HBCUs and Predominantly Black Institutions, or PBIs. I am very glad that the bill strengthens the TRIO programs that serve first-generation low- income students, and the prohibition on the Department of Education's Absolute Priority within the Upward Bound program.

At this time I would like to engage in a colloquy with Chairman Miller.

I yield.

I thank the chairman of the committee for his clarification and appreciate his and the conferees commitment to writing the statute to promote unity among the higher education community that serves mostly African American students.

It is an excellent bill. I urge its passage.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I support the passage of the conference report for H.R. 4137, which authorizes the Higher

Education Opportunity Act. This bill reauthorizes the higher education act for the first time in 10 years. I commend full-Committee Chairman George Miller and sub-Committee Chairman Ruben Hinojosa for their leadership on this bill. I extend my deepest thanks to the Chairman for his commitment to enhancing minority education and for his steadfast support on multiple issues that were especially important to me and to institutions serving the Black community. I would be remiss if I did not thank the Education and Labor staff who so skillfully advocated to establish so many wonderful programs that will improve higher education opportunities for so many.

There are multiple provisions of this bill that will benefit Chicago and Illinois. To begin, this bill greatly expands access to higher education for low-income and minority students. By increasing Pell grants to $8,000, extending the grants to year-round, and allowing part-time students to qualify for Pell grants, this bill will enable many more of my constituents to attend college.

I am especially pleased that the bill authorizes programs for both undergraduate and masters programs at Predominantly Black Institutions. PBIs represent a growing cadre of four-year and two-year institutions that serve as the access point for a growing number of urban and rural Black students whose family and financial situations limit their ability to gain access to college in many states. Many of these students come from low-income families and are also ``first generation'' college students, whose educational preparation for college and family finances present special challenges to educational success. PBIs are not eligible to receive funding under the HBCU capacity-building funds given that PBIs were not established prior to 1964. The undergraduate PBI program will provide federal support to strengthen the institutional capacity of schools to attract, retain, and graduate their students. Chicago has many PBIs that provide high quality education for many low-income, minority students, including: Chicago State University, Malcolm X College, Harold Washington College, Olive-Harvey College, Kennedy King College, East-West University, Robert Morris College, and South Suburban College. In addition, the new PBI masters program promotes the development of more Black masters- level professionals in the science and health fields by providing specific institutional support. For example, Chicago State University will qualify for valuable aid to strengthen its masters programs in the biological sciences and computer science as well as strengthen its first professional program in pharmaceutical science. Together, these new PBI programs will enhance the access for low-income African American students to higher education.

I also am pleased that the bill strengthens both HBCU undergraduate and graduate education. As a graduate of an HBCU, I am very familiar with the benefits these institutions provide to low-income students. The new masters program for HBCUs in Title VII fills a void in current law. Title III, Part B includes institutional support for undergraduate education at HBCUs, and Section 326 provides institutional support for doctoral and first professional programs at HBCUs. The new Section 723 completes this continuum by supporting HBCUs with masters programs in the fields of science and health as well as clarifies the congressional intent that the existing Section 326 pertains to doctoral and first professional programs.

Further, the bill strengthens the TRIO programs, which are key supports for low-income, first-generation college students to prepare and succeed in higher education. Importantly, the bill institutes an appeals process when applicants have evidence of errors in the handling or scoring of the applications. A number of Chicago institutions unfortunately have had difficulties in the last few years with denial of applications for suspect reasons and due to glitches with the Grants.gov system. Having a procedure in place to allow due process for these applicants is an important element to ensuring a fair application process. Further, the bill prohibits the implementation of the absolute priority that the Department imposed on the Upward Bound program, forcing programs to dramatically alter the nature of the services provided. I am happy that any future evaluations of Upward Bound will exclude the cohorts of students chosen under this well-intentioned but ill-conceived priority.

Chicago also has many for-profit institutions of higher education that serve an important role in educating students. I am glad that the Conference Report provides additional flexibility for these institutions in terms of the 90/10 rule, including flexibility in the types of revenue that count toward the 10 percent, the Departmental response to violations of the rule, and exceeding loan limits as a result of the enactment of the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act. Further, I support the increased monitoring and reporting requirements of for-profit institutions as a means to provide transparency and safeguards for students.

I am happy that the bill emphasizes the need to support populations that are underrepresented in higher education. One such population about which I am particularly concerned is African American men. The under-representation of minority males, especially African American men, is a matter of public record that is reinforced by high drop-out rates in urban and rural school districts, and lower participation/ enrollment rates of these groups in colleges and universities. The American Council on Education's Minorities in Higher Education Annual Reports have consistently documented these factors for almost two decades. For example, although the enrollment of black men in higher education increased between 2000 to 2001, less than 3 percent of black men received a combination of associate's, bachelor's, or master's degrees. Clearly, ensuring success of students in higher education necessitates examining and promoting the success of minority males. To this end, the Conference Report includes a study of minority male access to and success in higher education that will provide key data to lawmakers so that we can better tailor our policies to promote minority men in higher education. The bill also encourages the involvement of individuals--such as African American men--who are from populations underrepresented in higher education in the TRIO programs, in teacher residency programs, in teacher preparation courses at minority serving institutions, and in loan forgiveness programs. These provisions will help ensure that the higher education community better reflects the diversity of our Nation.

Another population about which I am particularly concerned is individuals in prison. After Congress barred prisoners from receiving Pell grants in 1994, provision of postsecondary correctional education dropped greatly. Multiple empirical studies demonstrate that postsecondary correctional education improves the atmosphere in prisons, increases successful reentry, increases employment after release, and decreases criminal behavior. For example, studies show that such education helps improve communication among staff and inmates, develop positive peer role models, and reduce disciplinary infractions. Further, multiple studies show that postsecondary education saves taxpayers' money. In 2001, government analysts in Maryland calculated that such programs saved state taxpayers more than $24 million annually, more than two times what the state spent on such programs. Given that the average annual cost of incarceration is more than $22,000 per prisoner and that more than half of formerly- incarcerated people return to prison with 3 years, providing higher education within prisons promises to be a cost-effective investment of taxpayer dollars.

Currently, only approximately 5 percent of the total prison population is enrolled in postsecondary education. Current Federal postsecondary correctional grants target youth, resulting in a great need for such programs for adults. The Conference report expands higher education opportunities for older students by extending the qualifying age for such programs to 35 and by allowing up to 7 years to study while in prison. These provisions will allow greater flexibility to states to identify and serve individual inmates who are best able to benefit from postsecondary correctional education. In addition, the bill authorizes a study on the effectiveness of postsecondary correctional education. This study will greatly advance our understanding of what makes programs effective in educating individuals and reducing post release offending.

Further, I am pleased that the bill takes steps to ease the discrimination against low-income students with drug convictions. There are multiple problems with a one-size-fits-all penalty based on financial aid. It inappropriately uses the financial aid application process to apply a mandatory minimum sentence above and beyond what the judicial system has imposed for a restricted group of students. Also, given that the penalty applies only to students receiving Federal aid who must maintain a C average or higher, the current provision unfairly denies aid only to low-income, high-performing students. The Conference report makes it easier for students who lose aid to re-qualify for Federal aid after it is removed. The report also requires an important study of who is denied Federal aid so that lawmakers can better understand whether this policy penalizes particular categories of students compared to others. As the Committee on Education and Labor's Report indicated, the study will examine the demographic background of the students excluded from Federal aid by the drug prohibition as well as the nature of the offenses underlying the exclusion. The variables for study are clearly enumerated in the Committee Report.

In closing, there are many elements of this Conference report that will help many low-income students to access and succeed in higher education. I am proud to serve in the Congress that is making such a considerable investment in our students so that all youth--especially low-income, minority students--have access to quality postsecondary education.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Higher Education Opportunity Act, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it took us 5 long years to get here today on the cusp of the first comprehensive renewal of Federal higher education programs in a decade. I am here to tell you that sometimes what we say is true; good things do come to those who wait.

I want to begin by thanking Chairman Miller, chairman of the full committee, and Representatives Hinojosa and Keller, the chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee, for their strong efforts on this product that we have here today.

The four of us have worked as equal partners in this endeavor, not always agreeing, but never losing sight of our shared commitment to making higher education in this country more accessible, affordable, and accountable. Representative Castle has also been a close partner of mine in the effort to reign in college costs, and I want to recognize him for his commitment.

Of course, the House did not do this alone. Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi have worked equally hard, and I want to thank them and recognize them for their efforts. Although Senator Kennedy was not able to be here in Washington for our final conference meeting yesterday, he has had a profound impact on the legislation, and he remains in our thoughts. Senator Mikulski filled in for him and did a yeoman's job and we want to thank her for her efforts.

We know how important higher education is, both to individuals and to our Nation. A college degree can be a ticket to the middle class. It helps individuals prepare for good jobs, and allows them to pursue new skills in a changing economy. Higher education also has important societal benefits. College education citizens are healthier, more civically-minded, have lower unemployment rates, and use fewer government benefits. An educated citizenry is also vital to maintaining our competitive edge in a changing world.

Because higher education is so important, we have made it a priority to ensure all Americans have access to a quality, affordable college education. In addition to making close to $100 billion in financial aid available to students, the Federal Government also spends billions of dollars each year on aid to institutions, support for college access programs, investments in research and development, and many other avenues that support higher education.

Despite the considerable Federal investment, or perhaps, in part, because of it, colleges and universities have increased tuition and fees year in and year out. The increases have come in good economic times and in bad, whether enrollments are surging or holding steady. It seems the only thing consistent about college costs is that they are going up, and going up rapidly.

With this bill, we hope to change that. Our principles for reform are based on the idea that by giving good information to consumers, we can empower them to exert influence on the marketplace. Through the power of sunshine and transparency, we are lifting the veil on college costs and holding institutions of higher learning accountable for their role in the cost equation.

Those principles of sunshine and transparency are hallmarks of this bill, and not just in the area of college costs. We are also letting the sun shine in on college operations and quality through enhanced institutional disclosure and a more transparent accreditation process. There are numerous positive reforms in this bill, too many even for me to name.

Of course, it is not a perfect bill. No bill is. I am particularly concerned about the number of new programs created in the conference report. Rather than trying to micromanage from Washington by creating a brandnew program for every possible contingency, we should focus on less red tape and greater local flexibility.

However, on the whole, this bill is an achievement of persistence and commitment. It updates programs to meet the needs of students in the 21st century. It recognizes the value of for-profit institutions of higher education. It promotes distance education, a mode of delivery that becomes more important every day as gas prices force students to limit their commuting to and from school. And, it uses the power of sunshine and transparency to transform all aspects of our higher education system. Above all else, this bill

offers real solutions to the college cost crisis.

I thank Members on both sides of the aisle for their commitment to this cause.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield now to the subcommittee ranking member, the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Ric Keller, 4 minutes.

I yield now to the gentleman from Wisconsin, our senior member on the committee, Mr. Petri, 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield now to the gentlelady from Washington, a member of the committee, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, 5 minutes.

I am happy to yield now to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), subcommittee ranking member on the committee and champion of reducing college costs, 2 minutes.

Might I inquire how much time both sides have.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield now to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder), a member of the committee, for 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, could I inquire how much time we have left.

I would be happy to yield at this time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Tim Murphy) for 3 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to yield at this time to my good friend from across the aisle, a former member of the committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), 1 minute.

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

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

The Higher Education Opportunity Act is truly a bipartisan achievement, reflecting major priorities of both parties, as you can see from the debate. In recognition of that fact, I would like to take just a moment to touch on some of the reforms that Members on our side of the aisle were able to secure in this bill.

This bill includes meaningful steps to address the college cost crisis. I have been fighting this battle for years, and the steps in this bill are a victory for students and their families.

We have ensured that this bill increases accountability through the

power of sunshine and transparency. H.R. 4137 will put quality information in the hands of students and parents to help them make more informed decisions when choosing their path for obtaining a higher education.

This conference report protects student privacy by prohibiting the development of a Federal unit record system. Republicans believe students should not be forced to relinquish their privacy just because they wish to pursue post-secondary education.

This bill includes numerous reforms to strengthen Pell Grants for low-income students. The bill now prohibits Pell Grants from being provided to sex offenders that remain involuntarily confined by closing a loophole that allowed these individuals, deemed so dangerous that they cannot be released after completing their incarceration, to receive taxpayer-funded Pell Grants to pursue higher education. The bill also includes a sensible funding limitation to protect taxpayers and ensure students are making progress toward completing their degrees.

This conference report also includes a proposal to make transfer of credit policies public so students can plan ahead and avoid wasting time and money. It encourages States to develop and improve articulation agreements to make credit transfer easier among institutions within a State and across State lines.

Republicans have worked with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle for years to make it easier to apply for financial aid. Thanks to that effort, this legislation will create a shorter EZ-FAFSA form and make financial aid information available to students earlier in the college planning process.

Several committee members championed new efforts to ensure our higher education system can help meet our growing international competitive challenges. Specifically, the bill includes provisions to help increase the number of math, science, and foreign language teachers and professionals.

Republicans believe students should not be discriminated against on college campuses because of their political or ideological views, and that's why we fought to ensure the college conference would include an Academic Bill of Rights.

The bill also protects local control and prevents Federal meddling in curricula in programs under the Higher Education Act, including teacher training programs and within academic competitiveness grants.

Finally, in a time of war, we all recognize that our higher education system must be flexible enough to meet the unique needs of student- soldiers. The bill includes numerous proposals to improve higher education opportunities for members of the Armed Forces, including changes to allow greater participation in TRIO college access programs and improvements to the way financial aid is calculated for military personnel.

The bill also creates a Web site to make it easier for veterans and members of the military to find information on financial aid opportunities available to them, and it requires States to provide in- state tuition rates to members of the military, their spouses, and their dependent children.

These are just a few of the many reforms that were important to members of the committee during this process. I want to thank Chairman Miller again for working with me to ensure this bill is truly bipartisan, and I urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting yes on this bill that contains so many important provisions.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

For years, Republicans have fought on behalf of students and families to make college more affordable. Now our cause is bipartisan, and our vision for reform is the centerpiece of a comprehensive Higher Education Act reauthorization.

For students and families grappling with rising college costs, this bill establishes college affordability comparison tools to help put cost increases into perspective. Students will be able to search, sort, and compare key cost indicators for every school in the country. We will identify institutions that are the most costly, the least costly, and those with the fastest rising costs. And for schools engaging in a pattern of extraordinarily high cost increases, we demand greater disclosure and concrete steps to identify inefficiencies and fix them.

This legislation reflects Republican principles for reform, including financial aid simplification, protection of student privacy, safeguards for taxpayer dollars, an emphasis on competitiveness, and many more positive reforms.

Before I close, I want to recognize the staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work. I want to thank Amy Jones, in particular, for her tireless efforts. Amy has carried this bill now through two Congresses, and we couldn't have done it without her.

I also want to recognize Susan Ross and Rob Borden on my staff, along with my staff director, Sally Stroup.

I'd also like to recognize Chairman Miller's staff--and I'm trying to learn their names--including Gaby Gomez, Julie Radocchia, and Jeff Appel; great people, and they've worked hard and worked well together.

Mr. Speaker, this bill isn't perfect, but it will make a real difference to students and families struggling to pay for college. I encourage all of my colleagues to join me in voting yes to send this bill to the President for his signature.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank and commend Chairman Miller, Ranking Member McKeon, Chairman Hinojosa, and Ranking Member Keller for their hard work on this bill.

This bill contains many important provisions that will make college more affordable for our students, particularly the Pell Grant and loan forgiveness provisions.

It also has many provisions helpful to institutions of higher learning, especially Historically Black Colleges and Universities which have been funded for new master's programs at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Predominantly Black Institutions.

It also, as the Chairman has indicated, has a new program to help the rapidly growing field of modeling and simulation.

Mr. Speaker, there is new language in the bill dealing with the accreditation of colleges, and it is important to explicitly note that this new language does not adversely affect or change anti- discrimination provisions.

The bill also contains a direction to the Department of Education to reword the financial aid application to make it clear that students can get financial aid, even if they have a drug offense.

We have worked long and hard on this bill, and for the foregoing reasons, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. Speaker, it has been ten years since the Higher Education Act has been reauthorized and I am pleased that we will now make many

needed updates to this law. I would like to commend Chairman Miller, Ranking Member McKeon, Chairman Hinojosa, and Ranking Member Keller for their work on this bill. I would also like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate's Health, Education, Labor & Pensions committee, Senators Kennedy and Enzi. Additionally, I would like to express my gratitude to Senator Mikulski for all her efforts in Senator Kennedy's absence. I would also like to thank the House and Senate Committees' staff; we could not have reached this point without your hard work and dedication.

This bill contains many important provisions that will help make a college education more affordable for student and their families. I am particularly pleased with the increase in the authorization of the Pell grant and the loan forgiveness provision that will aid students who give back to their community if they enter a profession in an area of national need, including mental health professionals and child welfare workers.

The legislation also specifically assists minority students in several ways. For example, it contains a provision to promote cultural diversity in the entertainment media industry. It will also require that a study be conducted on whether race, ethnicity, or gender biases exist in the design of standardized admission tests used by higher education institutions. The information collected for the study is intended to be made available to the public--except in cases where the entity providing the information shows good cause or in the case where the information is proprietary--so that if such biases are found we can work to correct them.

The bill requires the Department of Education to conform hate crime reporting requirements to FBI guidelines to more accurately report incidents of hate crimes on our campuses. This will result in consistent and accurate reporting of crimes against persons and crimes against property. In addition, improved data will give parents and students a more accurate sense of campus safety and education institutions a better picture of their campus climate.

The legislation also contains many provisions helpful to institutions of higher education. The Secretary will now be required to develop and maintain a plan to help schools cope with natural and man-made disasters. The bill also creates an Education Disaster and Emergency Relief Loan Program to provide emergency loan funds to schools after a federal declared major disaster or emergency, including those schools affected by the 2005 Gulf Hurricanes. Additionally, the bill includes a provision which significantly helps schools affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita by holding them harmless for purposes of Title III funding.

This bill also does a great deal to help the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. The authorization levels for HBCUs have been increased to $375 million dollars, which is almost three times the amount that is in the current Higher Education Act. The amount for the Historically Black Graduate Institutions program has significantly increased as well. The bill also provides funding for Masters programs at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Predominantly Black Institutions that focus on science, technology, engineering, mathematics, health and other fields in which Blacks are underrepresented.

The legislation strengthens and develops college-level programs in the rapidly growing field of Modeling and Simulation. This is a field of study that refers to replicating a system on a smaller scale or on a computer for extensive examination. There is not a single field of study or profession that cannot benefit from this type of analysis including urban planning, medicine and national security.

This legislation includes several positive changes to the TRIO programs, which provide assistance to low-income and first generation college-going students. The bill eliminates the Absolute Priority conditions imposed on Upward Bound programs by the Department of Education without requiring a recompetition. In addition, the bill creates an appeals process for TRIO programs to ensure that the grantmaking process is as fair and transparent as possible.

Mr. Speaker, there is a clarification that I feel must be made with regard to new language added to an existing accreditation provision. Current law requires that accrediting agencies or associations apply and enforce their standards in a manner that respects the missions of institutions of higher education. This bill states that respecting missions of institutions of higher education includes religious missions. It is important to explicitly note what is and is not intended by the new language. Pursuant to the House Report filed by the House Committee on Education and Labor on December 19, 2007 (H. Rept. 110-500, Part I), it is important to make clear that this new language does not affect or change nondiscrimination provisions. The House Report states in relevant part:

``The new language requiring accrediting agencies or associations to apply and enforce their standards in a manner that respects the missions of institutions of higher education, including religious missions, reflects Congress' belief that accredited institutions should be allowed to choose their own missions rather than having them imposed or regulated by accrediting bodies. In response to concerns raised by Representatives Robert C. Scott (D-VA) and Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX) about whether the amendment would harm the ability of accreditors to enforce nondiscrimination provisions, the author of the amendment, Representative Timothy Walberg (R-MI), explained that the provision would not affect nondiscrimination provisions and instead would require accreditors to respect the missions of schools, including when the missions are religious.

``It is the intent of the Committee that this amendment does not change or alter current accreditation requirements, and the exemptions included in those requirements (such as those allowed by the American Bar Association and the American Psychological Association), for the enforcement of nondiscrimination provisions. The Committee also notes that this provision does not alter title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 or other federal antidiscrimination statutes, which remain applicable to institutions of higher education to the same extent as before. The Department of Education shall not promulgate any regulations that provide any new exceptions to current nondiscrimination provisions.

``It is also the intent of the Committee that this amendment does not change or alter current accreditation requirements, and the exemptions included in those requirements, for training professionals in the practice of medicine and other health care professions.''

Similarly, the Senate report that accompanies S. 1642 (the companion bill to H.R. 4137) filed by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on November 15, 2007 (Report No. 110-231) confirms this position. The Senate report states in relevant part:

``Accrediting agencies or associations recognized by the Department of Education are invested with a public trust and perform an important public function. Congress expects that those receiving Department recognition will perform those functions with the same diligence and competence as would be provided by any public body and that their procedures will be conducted with the same level of transparency, due process, and accountability that would apply to the Department if it performed this function itself.

``The new language requiring accrediting agencies or associations to apply and enforce their standards in a manner that respects the missions of institutions of higher education, including religious missions, reflects these goals. It is not intended to allow an institution to deny a person participation in, the benefits of, or to subject a person to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance under existing laws, including those with respect to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability; or because the person has not complied with a standard of the institution that requires the person to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability.''

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to highlight a provision included in the Statement of Managers to the Conference which I feel is extremely important. Currently, the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) is written in a way that misleads many students to believe that if they have been convicted of a drug offense, they do not qualify for financial aid. In the Statement of Managers, Conferees encourage the Department to reword the FAFSA to more accurately reflect the ways in which students who have been convicted of drug offenses can obtain financial aid.

Mr. Speaker, we have worked long and hard for a comprehensive, bipartisan bill. While not perfect, I believe this bill goes a long way towards making college more affordable for students and their families and towards helping our institutions and higher education provide a quality education to our nation's youth. For the foregoing reasons, I support the bill and urge my colleagues to support it.