Restoring GI Bill Fairness Act of 2011

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1383) to temporarily preserve higher rates for tuition and fees for programs of education at non-public institutions of higher learning pursued by individuals enrolled in the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs before the enactment of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

I rise today in support of H.R. 1383, as amended, the Restoring GI Bill Fairness Act of 2011. This bill would temporarily increase the Post-9/11 GI Bill program's national cap on tuition and fees paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs on behalf of certain veterans pursuing programs of education at non-public institutions of higher learning from $17,500 to $27,000.

The original Post-9/11 GI Bill that became effective on August 1, 2009, required VA to pay 100 percent of the tuition and fee charges up to a maximum cap that is based on a State's most expensive in-state undergraduate tuition and fee charges at a public institution of higher learning on behalf of a veteran with at least 36 cumulative months of active duty since September 11, 2001. Veterans with fewer months of service since that day of infamy would get a proportionally smaller amount. The maximum payment would apply to veterans attending both public and private degree-granting institutions of higher learning. As a result of basing tuition and fee payments on the in-state undergraduate rate, VA made tuition and fee payments well in excess of $20,000 annually on behalf of veterans attending private institutions in States with high tuition and fee charges at State schools.

In addition to tuition and fee payments, the new GI Bill provides a monthly living stipend. The stipend is the same amount paid to an E-5, generally the pay grade of a sergeant or petty officer second class, at the ``with-dependents'' rate in the zip code of the school the veteran is attending. For example, a veteran attending the University of Maryland in College Park, Maryland, receives $1,881 per month for the 2010-2011 school year. The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010, which was passed on December 16 of last year, made several changes to the Post-9/11 GI Bill. Those changes included a national cap of $17,500 on tuition and fee payments for veterans attending non-public institutions, effective August 1, 2011. The $4.1 billion Pay-As-You-Go cost of providing those changes was met by reducing education benefits in some areas. For example, a $17,500 cap on tuition and fees paid on behalf of veterans attending private schools was instituted to help pay for expanded eligibility for other veterans.

Although the cap of $17,500 a year will be a potential increase in payments for veterans in most States, some veterans attending non- public schools in seven states--New York, Texas, Arizona, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina--will see their tuition and fees payments reduced by thousands of dollars. Reducing tuition and fee payments could force veterans in these States to find non-GI Bill resources such as loans, grants or employment income to pay tuition and fees. To counter the coming reduction, H.R. 1383, as amended, would temporarily increase the cap on tuition and fees from $17,500 up to $27,000 for 3 years beginning the 1st of August of 2011. This increase would apply only to veterans who were enrolled in non-public institutions of higher learning before April 1, 2011. I believe it is only fair that we grandfather in these veterans.

To meet statutory Pay-As-You-Go offset requirements, the manager's amendment to H.R. 1383 would extend existing loan fee requirements associated with the subsequent use of a VA loan guarantee for 1 year at slightly higher rates than would otherwise apply. Although not perfect, I believe this offset is dwarfed by the $4.1 billion in offsets from veterans' education benefits passed by the House last December with only three Members voting in opposition. I would also note that the veterans' community has previously supported similar offsets when used to improve veterans' benefits as is being done in H.R. 1383.

Madam Speaker, this bill is supported by the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, the Military Officers Association of America, Student Veterans of America, AMVETS, and the Reserve Officers Association. I would like to include these letters of support in the Record.

I believe the alternative seen in the manager's amendment meets the concerns expressed by Members desiring as minimal an impact as possible on our veterans. I encourage all Members to support H.R. 1383, as amended.

Iraq and Afghanistan

Veterans of America,

Washington, DC.

Hon. Jeff Miller,

Rayburn House Office Building,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Miller: Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of

America (IAVA) strongly supports H.R. 1383 to temporarily

preserve higher rates for programs of education at non-public

institutions of higher learning pursued by individual

enrolled in the Post-

9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Program of the

Department of Veterans Affairs.

The Post 9/11 GI Bill will be remembered as one of the

shrewdest investments in our country's veterans for

generations to come. The recent improvements to the Post 9/11

GI Bill will allow an additional 400,000 Operation Iraqi

Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom veterans to fully

utilize their hard earned GI Bill benefits. While a historic

upgrade to GI Bill benefits, these reforms caused benefits

for a small number of student veterans to drop. This bill

will insure that veterans currently utilizing their GI Bill

at our nation's most expensive institutions are not left

behind and can complete their education.

We have history on our side. After the World War II GI Bill

was enacted, Congress had to pass improvements to forge our

country's smartest investment. IAVA believes that just like

the WWII GI Bill, the Post-

9/11 GI Bill, with these improvements in H.R. 1383, will help

build the next greatest generation.

If we can be of any help in advancing H.R. 1333 please

contact Tim Embree at (202) 544-7692 or tim@iava.org. We look

forward to working with you.

Sincerely,

Paul Rieckhoff,

Executive Director.

Madam Speaker, I am now happy to yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, the fine gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman).

Madam Speaker, I once again encourage all Members to support H.R. 1383, as amended.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 1383) to temporarily preserve higher rates for tuition and fees for programs of education at non-public institutions of higher learning pursued by individuals enrolled in the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs before the enactment of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010, and for other purposes.

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

I rise today in support of the Senate amendments to H.R. 1383, as amended, the Restoring GI Bill Fairness Act of 2011. The bill would temporarily restore the Post-9/11 GI Bill program's original method of paying tuition and fees to veterans attending private schools in several States.

When the original Post-9/11 GI Bill was enacted, veterans were promised that the VA would pay 100 percent of tuition and fees up to a State's most expensive instate undergraduate tuition and fee charges at a public institution of higher learning. The State-based cap applied to veterans who chose both public and private schools. What this meant to some veterans attending schools in certain States was tuition and fee payments could be well in excess of $20,000 annually. Veterans applied and enrolled in these schools based on that original promise.

However, in an effort to ``fix'' some elements of the original GI Bill, Congress left those veterans in a bind. The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010, which was enacted on January 4, 2011, made several changes. And one of those changes included a national cap of $17,500 on tuition and fee payments for veterans attending private schools, a change that will go into effect 1 week from today. For veterans that were enrolled in certain private schools in several States, including New York, Texas, Arizona, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina, this change has real consequences. They will see their tuition and fee payments reduced by thousands of dollars. And, Mr. Speaker, I just don't think that's fair.

We shouldn't change the rules on these veterans when they had already decided to attend the school of their choice and made financial decisions based on those rules. On May 23, the House unanimously voted to keep the original promise made to these veterans in H.R. 1383. The Senate has now acted on that bill, and we're ready to finish the job and send the bill to the President before these cuts can take place.

Similar to the original House measure, the Senate amendment would temporarily restore the cap on tuition and fees to the State-based method effective on August 1, 2011. This increase would apply only to veterans who were enrolled in nonpublic institutions of higher learning in the seven States that I mentioned previously before the 4th of January of 2011--in other words, they had to have already been enrolled on the 4th of January of this year--a change from the House-passed version which was actually April 1 of 2011. Veterans who initially enrolled after January 4, 2011, would be subject to the new cap.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that some veterans are concerned about the January 4 eligibility date. We have talked with VA. They have assured us that any veteran who has applied and was accepted to a school on or before the 4th of January of 2011 will be covered under this particular bill we are considering on the floor today. Veterans who applied or were accepted after that date will be grandfathered under H.R. 1383.

I believe VA's interpretation of the bill accurately reflects the House's intent. I would note that this bill, as amended, passed the Senate unanimously, and, of course, it passed this body unanimously as well.

I reserve the balance of my time and would encourage a positive vote by all my colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the Senate amendments to H.R. 1383.

I have no further requests for time.

Once again, I encourage all Members to support my motion to concur in the Senate amendments.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I thank the chairman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support for H.R. 1657 that would revise the enforcement penalties for misrepresentation of a business concern as a small business concern owned and controlled by a veteran or a small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans.

Section 502 of Public Law 105-50 set a goal for all Federal agencies to spend at least three percent of their procurement funds with small businesses owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans. On October 21, 2004, President Bush reinforced the Federal Government's 3 percent goals by signing Executive Order 13360. According to the Small Business Administration, at the time of that executive order, the overall Federal procurement from service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses was about .38 percent, or about one-tenth of the goal set by statute and executive order. Even the VA was short of the goal, spending about 1.3 percent service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses.

To help VA meet the goal, section 5 of Public Law 109-461 gave some new

tools to the VA contracting staff that essentially gave service- disabled veteran-owned small businesses preference in small business set-aside contracts while not ignoring the VA's other statutory set- aside goals such as for firms qualified as HUBZone and minority-owned small businesses. As a result, SBA data for fiscal year 2009 shows that overall Federal spending with service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses was about 1.98 percent, and VA spent nearly 17 percent with service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses.

Clearly, the law was having a positive result for veteran-owned small businesses. Unfortunately, as James Earl Jones said in ``Field of Dreams'': ``If you build it, they will come.'' The ``they'' in this case are unscrupulous businesses that falsely claim veteran and disabled-veteran-owned status and the veterans who front for them.

The GAO did a review of 10 firms claiming to be service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses and found that none of them qualified as service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. Since then, staff has continued to meet with the GAO and VA's Inspector General, and it is fair to say that there is no shortage of businesses fraudulently claiming to be veteran and/or service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses.

The original legislation merely authorized the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to debar these frauds for a period determined by the Secretary. However, given the continuing exposure of firms trying to steal contracts from legitimate veteran small businesses, I feel it necessary to provide some teeth to the law. My bill will direct the Secretary to debar these fraudulent firms and their principals for 5 years, and it would also set a schedule to speed up that action.

Madam Speaker, I note that the VA did not support the bill, citing a one-size-fits-all approach could harm firms who make an honest mistake in claiming status as a veteran or service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. I again invite the VA to work with us to perfect a bill that will discourage frauds while protecting these contracts for valid veteran and service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses.

I believe that at a time when the economy is very difficult and veterans are looking to either start their business or go back to work, this bill will ultimately meet the need and protect those veterans and the businesses that are available to them.

I thank my distinguished ranking member, Mr. Braley, for his bipartisan support, as well as Chairman Miller and Ranking Member Filner for bringing H.R. 1657 to the House. I urge Members to support the bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Again, I thank the chairman and the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman), for working to improve on a very good piece of legislation. The 21st Century GI Bill was an improvement and a recognition that our modern warriors, especially those in the Guard and Reserves, were shouldering an incredible burden in these current conflicts protecting our freedoms.

With that, the 21st Century GI Bill went into effect, but I applaud this Congress for having the foresight to look, if something's not working correctly, bring it back and let's try and work through it. I am very much in support of this piece of legislation.

I also again want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee and the full committee for their willingness to work on an offset issue, one of the very difficult things that we have to do, and I applaud you for taking it head-on. We all understand the challenge of the financial situation and the need to make sure that every penny of the taxpayer's dollar is watched over carefully. I certainly don't think anyone wants to shortchange our veterans, but we will certainly look and do all we can. I think the compromise that we reached is certainly the way the public would want us to go. I am certainly happy with those new ones.

I think what's really important on this is, listening to the chairman talk about the different States where there were discrepancies, we need to be very clear--and I think this bill does that--that these veterans are not New York veterans, they're American veterans. They're Texan veterans, South Carolina veterans, and we need to make sure that we get that in there correctly.

There were a few issues that I think we can continue to talk about that came up from the VA themselves in implementation of the bill. I hope we continue, as I am sure we will in our committee and others, to keep focusing on that to make sure that we can get it in and make sure there is not a delay to our servicemembers. They deserve to have it done on time.

Again, this is a good piece of legislation. We took on a challenging subject, the willingness to correct something that was needed to be corrected, and then the willingness to find the pay-for that was necessary. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, again, I appreciate the gentleman from Indiana's work on this. I think we made a good piece of legislation even better, and that's a good thing. That's a good charge for us.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of Chairman Miller's manager's amendment to H.R. 1383, the Restoring GI Bill Fairness Act of 2011.

The bill would increase the cap on tuition and fees set by the Post- 9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2010, passed by Congress on December 16, 2010, as signed into law by President Obama as Public Law 111-377.

The new law made several changes to the Post-9/11 GI Bill, including imposing a national cap of $17,500 per academic year on tuition and fees paid to private institutions. Unfortunately, the cap will reduce VA payments on behalf of up to 30,000 veterans already enrolled in these private schools by thousands of dollars in at least seven States. Those States would include New York, Texas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, South Carolina, and New Hampshire.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 1383, as amended, would raise that cap to $27,000 for a period of 3 years for veterans already enrolled in these private schools as of April 1, 2011. Veterans who enroll after that date would be subject to the $17,500 cap on tuition and fees.

In determining the amount of the new, temporary cap, we found that the College Board data showed that the average net tuition and fees charged to independent students attending the most expensive tier of private schools was roughly $22,540.

Therefore, we believe that when combined with other Federal benefits like Pell Grants and the post-9/11 G.I. Bill's Yellow Ribbon program, the vast majority of veterans attending private institutions would not experience out-of-pocket costs. I would also point out that the Yellow Ribbon program offers schools the opportunity to make up any difference between the basic benefit and actual charges by sharing the difference dollar for dollar with the VA.

Finally, I support the revised PAYGO offset. By meeting this change, we meet our statutory budget rules and allow veterans monthly stipends to reflect the most current amount of basic allowance for housing paid to servicemembers at the E-5 with dependents rate.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1383, as amended.