American Opportunity Tax Credit Act of 2013

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 680, I call up the bill (H.R. 3393) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to consolidate certain tax benefits for educational expenses, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3393.

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

Today, more and more Americans are pursuing the dream of earning a college degree, but for many, realizing that dream is getting more difficult. Tuition prices continue to climb, making it harder for Americans to plan for and afford a higher education. Worse yet, our broken Tax Code makes it harder than ever to pay for it.

Currently, there are 15 complicated and, at times, overlapping education provisions that include over 90 pages of IRS instructions. Students and parents alike are already juggling busy schedules as is, and they shouldn't be forced to go through 90 pages of IRS explanations just to figure out the best way to save and pay for a college education.

We need a simple solution that makes it easier to qualify for tax relief and to ultimately afford college. We owe it to the millions of young adults paying their way through college and the families who budget every year to save for their children's education to simplify the system and help make a good education affordable.

The bill before us, H.R. 3393, the Student and Family Tax Simplification Act, would do just that. This legislation will make paying for college easier, by combining and making more efficient four tax benefits for higher education into a new, simpler, and more valuable American opportunity tax credit, and this new, improved credit will provide greater benefits for those who need it most.

I am proud that this bipartisan provision is based off of years of work by the Ways and Means Committee and, in particular, committee members Diane Black of Tennessee and Danny Davis of Illinois, the cochairs of the Education and Family Benefits Tax Reform Working Group, who worked across the aisle to help simplify the Code.

I should also note that the Obama administration has expressed support for an approach that assumes a permanent extension of the AOTC. We have a real opportunity today to work across the aisle to make life better for hardworking Americans.

By consolidating the current American opportunity tax credit, the Hope Scholarship credit, the lifetime learning credit, and the college tuition deduction into one simplified AOTC credit, college students can get the help they need without navigating almost 100 pages of forms.

The bill would provide a permanent 100 percent tax credit for the first $2,000 of certain higher education expenses and a 25 percent tax credit for the next $2,000 of expenses.

The first $1,500 of the credit is refundable, ensuring that students get the benefits, regardless of tax liability. This can go a long way for students and their families, especially in these tough economic times.

The American Association of Community Colleges and the Association of Community College Trustees, who cite the AOTC as the most important source of support for college students in the Tax Code, recently voiced their support for this bill, stating, ``The legislation achieves several important objectives for the Nation's college students, who continue to face substantial financing challenges, even at low-cost community colleges. Its simplification of the current array of higher education tax benefits is critical, given that their complexity has led to widespread underutilization.''

Additionally, this provision would allow Pell grants to be used for a wider array of expenses, including room and board, without triggering additional tax liability. Not only does this provision have widespread bipartisan support, but a postelection poll found that over 80 percent of Americans support extending these policies.

No one should be discouraged from pursuing continued learning, but because tuition prices continue to climb while wages continue to fall, families and students nationwide are wondering if they can even afford it.

Today we can do better. We can do better by these hardworking Americans. I encourage my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to move this bill through the House and ask for both the Senate and the administration to work with us in finding simple, commonsense solutions like these for the American people.

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

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

I insert in the Record letters of support for the legislation from the American Association of Community Colleges and the Association of Community College Trustees, as well as the United States Student Association.

American Association of Community Colleges, Association

of Community College Trustees,

July 21, 2014.

Dear Representative: On behalf of the American Association

of Community Colleges (AACC) and the Association of Community

College Trustees (ACCT), which represent the nation's more

than 1,100 community college presidents and their trustees,

we write in support of H.R. 3393, the Student and Family Tax

Simplification Act. The legislation achieves several

important objectives for the nation's college students, who

continue to face substantial financing challenges, even at

low-cost community colleges. Its simplification of the

current array of higher education tax benefits is critical

given that their complexity has led to widespread under-

utilization.

H.R. 3393 also includes a number of enhancements to the

American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC) that benefit college

students:

Makes AOTC Permanent: Currently set to expire at the end of

2017, the AOTC is the most important source of support for

college students in the tax code. H.R. 3393 makes the benefit

permanent and ensures that it will remain in place for

students and families.

Increases Refundability: The AOTC's partial refundability

is of great assistance to the many low-income students who

attend community college. Currently, the maximum

refundability under the AOTC is $1,000. H.R. 3393 increases

that amount by 50%, raising it to $1,500, and provides

students an easier path to claim that full refund.

Creates Better Alignment with the Pell Grant: Currently, an

estimated one million college students with unmet financial

need do not receive any benefit from the AOTC due to its poor

coordination with the Pell Grant program. The vast majority

of these students attend low-cost institutions, particularly

community colleges. H.R. 3393 remedies this situation.

Indexes the AOTC to Inflation: H.R. 3393 recognizes that

college prices are not static, and adjusts the AOTC for

inflation (but not college tuition) starting in 2018.

We recognize that this legislation embodies certain trade-

offs. Overall, however, it would better target benefits to

community college students and other low-income students, and

create a simplified system that greatly benefits all students

and families. These are critically important objectives, and

action on them is overdue. We thank you for your

consideration of this legislation and urge its approval by

the House of Representatives.

Sincerely,

Walter G. Bumphus,

AACC President and CEO.

J. Noah Brown,

ACCT President and CEO.

Mr. Speaker, I know we are hearing a lot from the other side about how this ought to be paid for, but they, frankly, exempted this from PAYGO. Well, what does that mean? They said this doesn't need to be paid for--this is such important policy--because if we can get people started on the road to an education by getting a college degree, their chances of succeeding economically in life are so much better. And that really has become a basic for succeeding in America today is to get that bachelor's degree.

I know they are concerned about the graduate students, but, frankly, the Tax Code isn't there for those going to Harvard Law and Stanford Medical School. And there are other provisions that help provide for students: grants, loans, and scholarships.

This is about how can the Tax Code, how can all Americans help those get that basic level of education that gets you that bachelor's degree that gets you on the road of economic opportunity, because if we don't have an upwardly mobile society, we actually put at risk the American Dream.

With that, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black), a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, and I ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black) control the remainder of the time.

Mr. Speaker, when I hear my friends from the other side talk about their concern for the growing national debt, I know we must have a good bill because they don't want to talk about the bill. The deficit went up every year the Democrats were in the majority, and it has gone down every year the Republicans have been in the majority, but let me talk a little bit about this piece of legislation.

When it was created, it was not paid for. It was created for 2 years. When it was renewed in 2010 for 2 years, it was not paid for. When it was renewed in 2012 for 5 years, it was not paid for.

What we have in this country is repeatedly renewing tax policy for short term, not paying for it, not making it reliable. We are the only nation in the world that does this. What we are looking for is not only making this policy simpler and easier to understand, as the sponsor of the bill has explained very well, but we also want to make this permanent so we don't have to come back and wonder, so families that are planning for three or four of their kids to go to college over the next 10 years don't have to wonder, Are these provisions going to be there? Am I going to finally figure out these 100 pages of instructions and start to plan for my children's college education only to find, oh, Congress didn't get around to extending this provision this time?

So part of this is about permanency. How do we make these policies last? Also, how do we make sure that people at the lower end of the economic ladder have a chance to save for college, have a chance to get in college, even though they may not have income to qualify for some of the tax credits?

This reform does that. I think this is an important step forward. It has been extended basically for a budget window without being paid for by both parties, so let's call it what it is, it is permanent policy.

Let's make it permanent policy so families and students can rely on a constant policy, so that they can plan and save for a college education, which is becoming more and more a basic standard that people need to succeed in life.

I think if we can do anything this year, it is about making a statement that we want to help families and students succeed not only in school, but also going forward in their careers and lives.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order against the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my point of order and claim the time in opposition to the motion.

Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit has absolutely nothing to do with helping give middle class families the resources need to send their kids to college. This has nothing to do with making tax policy more certain, easier to understand, or simplifying a very complex area of the Tax Code. This has nothing to do with helping families who are struggling to pay for education.

Let's get on with trying to do that job. Let's reject this motion to recommit, let's pass the underlying bill, and let's help middle class America.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

What Republicans are, in essence, trying to do here and elsewhere, if I might say so today, is to soften their image. But they can't run away from the hard reality that at every turn, over the last several years, they have sought to pass laws making life more difficult for middle- and low-income families.

On the Republican chopping block, unemployment insurance blocked for 3 million Americans. Food assistance for low-income Americans would be cut by nearly 20 percent in the Ryan Republican budget, and a minimum wage increase hasn't occurred in 5 years, yet Republicans refuse to provide an increase. Medical assistance for Americans would be slashed by the Ryan Republican budget, with funding for Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program cut to the tune of 26 percent within 10 years. Social Services Block Grants, which provide flexible funds for States to help vulnerable populations, are eliminated under the Ryan Republican budget. Pell grants would be reduced by 400,000 under the Ryan Republican budget. Job training funding was targeted for deep cuts in the 2011 spending bill the House Republicans passed, and housing assistance would end for 800,000 low-income families in the Transportation-HUD Appropriations bill House Republicans just passed.

Indeed, hard-hearted actions contradict the soft rhetoric of today. We should be very skeptical when zebras try to change their stripes.

Today's legislation is part of a set of 14 tax provisions that Ways and Means Republicans have marked up and made permanent without offsets at a cost of $825 billion to taxpayers. By the end of this week, the total that House Republicans will have passed on the floor is more than $700 billion, not a dime offset. It is kind of easy to come here and say this is what we want to do when we don't pay a dime to do it.

Let it be clear in terms of this call on bipartisanship. All the Democrats on Ways and Means voted against this bill, and the Statement of Administration Policy says it opposes it. Let me give some details.

In simplifying education provisions within the Tax Code, this bill leaves behind numerous undergraduate students, graduate students, and lifetime learners. It replaces the Hope Scholarship credit and repeals both the lifetime learning credit and the now-expired deduction for qualified tuition expenses, and it limits the overall deduction for the first 4 years of schooling.

It harms students across the board. Undergraduates who take longer than 4 years to complete their degrees would be impacted, a change that loses sight of the fact that the median length of time that it takes undergrads to get their degrees is, today, more than 4 years. Adult learners would face higher costs. Three in four students are adult learners, who tend to take much longer to complete their degrees because they work full-time, have dependents, serve in the military, or have some combination of the foregoing and take longer to complete their degree.

Low-income and middle-income graduate students would lose out. In 2013, the lifetime learning credit, which this bill eliminates, served nearly 2 million students with incomes at or below $75,000, including 1 million with an income of $40,000 or less. Two years ago, one-quarter of all graduate students earned less than $11,000. During the same year, 31 percent of the 1.3 million master's degree students received no financial aid. Two years ago, one-quarter--one-quarter--of all graduate students earned less than $11,000. During

the same year, 31 percent of the 1.3 million master's degree students received no financial aid. In 2011, nearly 2 million tax returns claimed the qualified tuition deduction, which expired at the end of this year and this bill does not extend.

That is one reason we have a letter from the American Council on Education. Here is what they say:

However, as we discussed in our attached letter of April 4,

2014, to Ways and Means Committee members, there are a number

of other changes in the legislation which cause us great

concern. Even as reported, the bill would negatively impact

many low- and middle-income students and families who benefit

under current law. It also would harm graduate students and

lifetime learners who utilize the tuition deduction or the

LLC. Because we continue to have serious concerns about the

Student and Family Tax Simplification Act, we cannot

support--we cannot support--the bill as currently written,

even in the form as reported.

This is sent on behalf of the following: the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, the American Council on Education, the Association of American Universities, the Association of Governing Boards, the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities, the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities, College and University Professional Association for Human Resources, the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, the Council of Graduate Schools, and the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities.

That letter so much speaks to this issue.

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

I include a letter from the American Council on Education with all of the signatories in the Record.

American Council on Education,

Washington, DC, July 17, 2014.

Re Student and Family Tax Simplification Act (H.R. 3393)

Dear Representative: On behalf of the higher education

associations listed below, I write to express concerns about

H.R. 3393, the Student and Family Tax Simplification Act, and

encourage further improvements to this important legislation

when it is considered on the House floor next week.

We have long supported reform of the American Opportunity

Tax Credit (AOTC), the Hope Scholarship Credit, the Lifetime

Learning Credit (LLC), and the tuition deduction. All of

these currently are overly complex and difficult for students

and their families to correctly use. We believe a

consolidated credit can simplify the higher education tax

benefits while retaining positive aspects of the present

credits and deductions to better serve low- and middle-income

traditional and nontraditional students now and in the

future, helping them attain an associate or bachelor's degree

or pursue post-baccalaureate education or lifelong learning.

Overall, H.R. 3393 takes several important steps forward to

create a simpler, single tax credit. We applaud the fact that

the bill increases refundability and includes an important

fix to better coordinate the AOTC and the Pell Grant. We are

also very pleased that the bill was amended at markup to

maintain the AOTC's current income phase-out limits.

However, as we discussed in our attached letter of April 4,

2014 to Ways and Means Committee members, there are a number

of other changes in the legislation which cause us great

concern. Even as reported, the bill would negatively impact

many low- and middle-income students and families who benefit

under current law. It also would harm graduate students and

lifetime learners who utilize the tuition deduction or the

LLC. Because we continue to have serious concerns about the

Student and Family Tax Simplification Act, we cannot support

the bill as currently written, even in the form as reported.

As a result of our strong support for reforming these

credits, we have had many discussions with tax staff over the

past months about ways to implement reforms that address our

concerns. We believe the legislation could be modified to

ensure students who are currently eligible for a federal tax

benefit could still receive some benefit. For example, one

improvement we support is replacing the bill's proposed four-

year limit for the AOTC with a lifetime dollar cap that would

allow part-time, full-time, and graduate students to take

advantage of the credit.

We remain deeply committed to continuing to work with the

authors of the bill and the Ways and Means Committee to

improve the Student and Family Tax Simplification Act to

better serve traditional and non-traditional low- and middle-

income students, now and in the future.

Sincerely,

Molly Corbett Broad,

President.

On behalf of:

American Association of State Colleges and Universities

American Council on Education

Association of American Universities

Association of Governing Boards

Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities

Association of Public and Land-grant Universities

College and University Professional Association for Human

Resources

Council for Christian Colleges & Universities

Council of Graduate Schools

Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU).

I now yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a member of our committee.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman.

I yield an additional 10 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, it is my real pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), a distinguished--to put it lightly--member of our committee.

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

I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), another member of our committee.

I yield an additional minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Could I ask how much time there is remaining on both sides?

Does the gentlewoman have other speakers?

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

The gentlewoman has just talked about her work in graduate school. This bill would eliminate help for millions of people in graduate school. That is what this bill does.

I now yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).

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

In conclusion, we favor on this side of the aisle simplification. We are in favor of reducing the number of pages. We are not in favor of leaving out millions of students.

This approach hasn't been refuted. It leaves out millions of undergraduates, millions of graduate students, and millions of people who are in longer-term education needs who can't complete college in 4 years, and, in many cases, want to go on to graduate school.

So what has happened here is another bill has come out of committee that is part of a package that was over $800 billion. It leaves out so many, yet you make it permanent. These are people permanently left out. Why?

Many of these bills go back some years. We will have to check back many years ago and see if perhaps they were paid for. The recent one was in the Recovery Act of 2009, which we favored, but we did not favor making permanent laws that would leave out. That is what is being done here.

I have heard: Oh, we will come back some other time. You are going to come back some other time when you have added a trillion dollars to the deficit? That is not believable.

Indeed, what is believable is the result of this kind of reckless course is it is going to squeeze further discretionary, nondefense expenditures. That squeezing out is, as I said earlier, is the hard- hearted approach of the Ryan budget.

We see what happens when Republicans essentially use the argument that we can't pay for it, when they cut all the kinds of programs that I mentioned at the beginning, so many were cut out in the Ryan Republican budget.

I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to, first of all, thank my colleagues on the Ways and Means Committee for all their help and their hard work on moving this bill forward. I would also like to thank Chairman Camp for his leadership and for his dedication in helping American taxpayers and families, which is really what this bill is about.

Coming from two hardworking parents with no more than a ninth grade education between them, attending college was little more than just a dream for me growing up. Yet, with my parents' support and some hard work, I was able to be the first of my family to attend college and go on to graduate with a degree in nursing. This has allowed me to spend over 40 years working as a nurse in the health care industry.

Just as this dream was for me, pursuing higher education is a dream for millions of children and their parents across this great Nation. It is a well known fact that the cost of education is climbing and that, for far too many, the ability to save and pay for college without ending up under a mountain of debt is simply out of reach.

Today's broken Tax Code does little to ease that financial burden or to even provide a sense of security that education will be a reality in the future. That is why, under Chairman Camp's leadership, I worked across the aisle with my colleague, Danny Davis, as the chair and cochair of the Ways and Means Committee's Education Tax Reform Working Group last year.

Over the course of our 7-month bipartisan working group meetings, frustration with the Tax Code was a common theme of what we heard. For instance,

there are currently 15 different tax benefits related to education. Four of those are designed to help individuals save prior to becoming a student, nine are available for while the student is in school, and two exist for when the student has completed his or her education.

It was overwhelming when we had tax experts explain it, so it was not difficult to imagine how parents trying to navigate these 90 pages of IRS instructions would simply toss up their hands and say, ``I give up.''

That is why the work that Mr. Davis and I did during the time together on this Education Tax Reform Working Group didn't end when we delivered our report to our colleagues. Instead, our desire to provide at least some relief from that frustration led the two of us to work to see how we could clean up the Code and help families struggling to finance education costs.

That process led us to introduce H.R. 3393, the Student and Family Tax Simplification Act. Now, this legislation consolidates four existing education provisions--the Hope credit, the American opportunity tax credit, the lifetime learning credit, and the tuition deduction--into a single, modernized and strengthened AOTC.

Streamlining the number of education provisions and retooling those that are most effective allows us to simplify the Code and reduce some of the confusion that exists today. As a result, students can spend less time figuring out how to finance the cost of education and more time developing the skills they need to succeed in our knowledge-based economy.

Mr. Speaker, I think we all can agree that it ought to be easier for any family to plan, save, and invest in education. Everyone in this Chamber can agree that we should do everything that we can to help American children attain higher education and achieve their dream.

So I am proud that, as the chairman has already referenced, the American Association of Community Colleges, the Association of Community College Trustees, the National Association of College Stores, and the United States Student Association--the United States Student Association--have announced their support for this bill.

Now I ask for my colleagues in the House to join me in supporting this commonsense measure to help American students and families.

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

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

I do want to say that this was an incredible experience for me to be able to work with such a fine gentleman as Mr. Davis.

We began this process with the chairman giving us an opportunity to take a look at this very complicated group of tax provisions in our code. What we found, with the Joint Committee on Taxation helping us, as I referenced in my opening remarks, there are 90 different pages, no less the fact that there are provisions that step on top of one another, and we actually asked the Joint Committee on Taxation, to help simplify this, to do a diagram for us, just a flowchart.

What we found was, they came back and said this is so complicated that we can't even do a flowchart that would make sense. So we set out asking various groups to come and talk to us. These went all of the way from the very conservative, the very progressive side, think tanks, universities, colleges, those who represented the 529 provision, and to just come and let us know about what they thought about what was currently in the code.

We heard consistently over and over again, it didn't matter where they were on the spectrum, we heard this is so complicated that people are not even using it because they can't figure out. As a matter of fact, there is a GAO study that indicated that 1.5 million tax filers who qualify for either the tuition and fee deduction of the lifetime learning credit in 2009 did not even claim the credit or the deduction because of its complication.

So it was my honor to work with my esteemed colleague in going to work to say: What can we do to simplify this so that we can make sure that people who really need this assistance are going to get that assistance that is there in the code but they can't even figure it out?

So after about 7 months, hammering back and forth about what we felt would best fit the needs of the students of this country and help to get them a start in college, to get them going, to be sure that they would have that opportunity to use those tax credits, we came up with this product. We then rolled it out with a press conference, and I am very proud to say that this was an effort of bipartisanship, one that I think if we could do more of that here in Congress, we would be accomplishing a lot. So it really is my honor to stand here today with my colleague who we worked so well together on this.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp), the esteemed chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

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

What I would like to do is read from a letter that we received in support of

this legislation from the American Association of Community Colleges and the Association of Community College Trustees.

I am just going to lift a couple of paragraphs out of here that I think address some of the responses from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I am only going to read three pieces, although there are more.

This is why they say that they believe this benefits college students. I want to read the one that says it ``makes AOTC Permanent: Currently set to expire at the end of 2017, the AOTC is the most important source of support for college students in the Tax Code. H.R. 3393 makes the benefit permanent and ensures that it will remain in place for students and families.''

The chairman referenced that just a few moments ago.

Another paragraph: ``Creates better alignment with the Pell grant: Currently, an estimated 1 million college students with unmet financial need do not receive any benefit from the AOTC due to its poor coordination with the Pell grant program. The vast majority of these students attend low-cost institutions, particularly community colleges.''

This bill remedies this situation.

Then the last piece: ``Indexes the AOTC to inflation: H.R. 3393 recognizes that college prices are not static and adjusts the AOTC for inflation starting in 2018.''

So I believe that that speaks to those pieces that we said are so important in this reform.

Now, I yield as much time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. McMorris Rodgers), the leader of our conference.

I am ready to close.

Mr. Speaker, I could say a lot of things, but I don't think there is any better way for me to conclude than for me to read a letter that I will submit for the Record from a student who actually sent this to me today.

I do want to read it, but I think you will see after I read it that the emphasis here is that we are helping those

who need help the most by what we are doing with the simplification of this particular part of the Code.

For the sake of the identity of the person, I am going to use the name Nancy.

Let me read this to you:

Dear Congresswoman Black, my name is Nancy, and I attend

Atlanta Technical College. The additional $500 in refunds in

your bill for students like me will be extremely beneficial.

I am the mother of five, full-time worker, and student.

Although I intend to continue my higher education once I

graduate from the Atlanta Technical College, I have found out

my Pell grant will expire next semester. I now find myself in

the position of taking out loans for future semesters to make

sure my tuition and books are paid for.

I plan to use my taxes to help with this dilemma. The

additional $500 may not seem like it would cover a lot, but

in my case, it will cover at least one three-credit class or

at least three of my textbooks. I would love the opportunity

to have an option of using these moneys that are outright

mine than to put myself in debt more by taking out a full

amount of any loan.

My only hope is that you take this letter into

consideration, for there are many others out there in my

predicament.

Dear Congresswoman Black, My name is Nancy and I attend

Atlanta Technical College. The additional $500 in refunds in

your bill for students like me would be extremely beneficial.

I am a mother of 5, full time worker and student. Although

I intend to continue my higher education once I graduate from

Atlanta Technical College, I have found out my Pell grant

will expire next semester. I now find myself in the position

of taking out loans for future semesters to make sure my

tuition and books are paid for.

I plan to use my taxes to help with this dilemma. The

additional $500 may not seem like it would cover a lot, but

in my case, it will cover at least one 3 credit class or at

least 3 of my textbooks. I would love the opportunity to have

an option of using monies that are out right mine, than to

put myself in debt more by taking out the full amount of any

loan.

My only hope is that you take this letter into

consideration, for there are many others out here in my

predicament.

I think there is no better way than to end with something that comes from the heart of a student who is working so hard. She has five children and is a full-time worker and student. Because of the refundability of this tax provision, if it were placed into law, you can see how it would really help those who we are trying to help the very most.

So I would urge my colleagues, for the sake of helping our students, especially those who are at the lower and middle income, to support H.R. 3393, the Student and Family Tax Simplification Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect and admiration for the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, my friend from Michigan. I hope his solution here today, given the dysfunction that we have seen in the process coming out of this Congress in recent years, is not just to come forward with a series of permanent changes to the U.S. Tax Code without paying for any of it and exploding our national debt for future generations to have to grapple with, but unfortunately, that has been the trend in the Ways and Means Committee over the last couple of months.

I also want to commend the work that the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black) has done with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis) in putting together this bipartisan bill.

I am all for simplification of the Tax Code. I am all for streamlining these tax credits to make it easier for students and their families to better afford higher education. I am all for finding a bipartisan path forward to make sure that no student is left behind, that those doors of educational opportunity are there and open for all Americans, but we ought to do that the right way, not the wrong way.

Unfortunately, the bill here before us today is the wrong way to approach the issue. First of all, it is one of 14 permanent changes to the Tax Code that have been reported out of the Ways and Means Committee now, exceeding over $800 billion, without any of it being offset and without a nickel of it being paid for--this on the heels of the last few years we have been trying to figure out a way to get our fiscal house put back in order.

There has been a whole lot of shrill and a whole lot of crying on this floor about runaway budget deficits and the unsustainable debt that our Nation has accumulated and the fact that we have to borrow so much money from China. This bill compounds that problem. It doesn't solve it.

This bill alone would add close to $97 billion to the national debt over the next 10 years. Again, none of it paid for, but there are also some substantive problems with this bill, too, that, unfortunately, due to a lack of hearings in the Ways and Means Committee, due to a lack of discussion and feedback from our universities throughout the country, is not addressed, not the least of which--and I have heard this from universities back in Wisconsin--that there is a significant administrative change hiding in this bill.

Currently, schools can report either eligible tuition charges that are billed to students or paid to students. This bill takes away the billing aspect of reporting to the IRS.

Now, that is probably a trend that we ought to pursue and should fix in the future, but to do it abruptly, given where the computer systems lie with their universities right now, is bound to cause severe disruption in regards to these tax credits for students.

I am afraid that it has not been well-vetted, and it hasn't been thought through because, again, it is an election year, and we are racing these bills to the floor in order to do our press releases back home and score cheap political points with constituencies that would prefer to see legislation advance without paying for it; but it is something that we ought to fix before we burden the bursars' offices throughout the Nation and trying to revamp their computer systems overnight. They are telling us it is not going to work.

Furthermore, the gentleman from Michigan has highlighted the impact this is going to have on our graduate students. The graduate students are affected by the streamlining of the education credits that are embodied in this bill because only 4 years are available under this legislation. It is expected to have a profound impact on the affordability of graduate education for students throughout the Nation. I don't think that has been vetted all that well either.

It is because we are not doing regular order around here. It is an election year--I get it--and there is nothing easier in the world to bring permanent changes to the Tax Code that everyone would desire to see, but without making the tough decision and paying for it as well, while at the same time coming forward with budget resolutions that is cutting back on the availability of Pell grants for low-income students or workstudy programs for low-income students or TRIO or GEAR UP programs that are geared for low-income students.

Somehow, some way, it became fashionable to cut those programs that have benefited low-income students, including myself. When I was a kid growing up, my family didn't have the financial means to send me to school, so I was able to qualify for a Pell grant, I did do workstudy all 4 years. Without that availability, I don't know where I would have ended up with my education.

That is where we seem to go to first in the budget for cuts and then coming forward today on a bill that will add $97 billion to the deficit without paying for it and without vetting it the way it should be. We have still got time. Let's do this right now.

I would encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' and give this body time to fix some of the deficiencies in the bill, but also to make the tough decision and do it in a fiscally responsible manner.

Today's bill is another element of a Republican agenda that has consistently weakened our Federal commitment to educational opportunity.

I agree with the American Council on Education which said:

``The Federal Tax Code is no substitute for the Pell grant, Federal Work-Study, and other Federal student aid programs.''

Republicans have voted again and again in this Congress to cut these investments in our future. House Republicans approved a budget that would eliminate $90 billion of Pell grants, would deny 125,000 students Federal Work-Study assistance, and would have reduced funding for Hispanic-serving universities and Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

Now the Republicans come to the floor and are really boasting of the fact that this particular version of the bill does not cut Federal tax incentives for education as much as they wanted to.

As originally introduced by my colleague from Tennessee, this bill would have denied 5 million Americans every year an opportunity to use education tax incentives that exist under current law. They would have slashed assistance under the act by $5 billion a year, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. And so they went back and tinkered with it a little bit, and they are here today to brag that they have a D-minus bill and that is better than the failing bill that they offered initially.

I understand that after years of opposing this particular incentive, they might want to change course. They all voted against the improvements, the changes that I authored in 2009 for the American Opportunity Tax Credit. They have consistently opposed the concept of refundability, that is, assisting those students who might not have a tax liability as big as the amount of the credit. And it is progress that they have come around to supporting the credit at all and the concept of helping those at the bottom of the ladder.

But while they have reduced the depths of the serious cuts that they proposed only a few months ago to these tax incentives, they have not stopped the bleeding. They deny assistance to many students across America who are assisted by our current law. That is why, as my colleague Mr. Levin pointed out, a group of educational institutions, whether it is Hispanic colleges or Christian colleges or land grant colleges, they all oppose this bill. They have said, and again I quote:

``The bill would negatively impact many low- and middle-income students and families who benefit under current law.''

That is what the educational experts say. And that is because the bill eliminates a guarantee under existing law called the Lifetime Learning Credit. It is eliminated entirely for so many students, and it is important to understand who those students are because I have seen and talked with them at places like San Antonio College, ACC, and St. Philip's College.

What kind of person are we talking about? Someone who is a single mother, who has a child to take care of, and continues to work trying to get her associate's degree first, to move out of a low-wage job into a better job, and then go on to UT or somewhere else, but she can't get it all done in 4 years; a mid-level worker who wants to shift industries and needs to upgrade his or her skills for a job in the new economy. They have to work and go to school at night. They can't get it all done in 4 years. A recent college graduate who says, you know, in order to get the job I am best qualified for, I am going to

have to have a master's degree. But they are denied assistance and the opportunity to climb up the economic ladder of success, not by the existing law, but by the changes that the Republicans proposed today.

All these students lose out. The impact is serious. According to the Department of Education, about half of all students pursuing a higher education attend part time, which inevitably extends the time it takes for them to complete the degree.

Eliminating a tax incentive for higher education that takes more than 4 years away will deal a blow to nearly 2 million students across America who claimed the Lifetime Learning Credit, or they did in 2013. Of these, about a million earn less than $40,000 a year. That is who is being cut by this.

I have legislation that over 100 of our colleagues have joined to do all the streamlining they talk about, but to make the American Opportunity Tax Credit permanent and to ensure that we don't cut out benefits to students who are counting on these benefits. We need to reject this bill.

We need to reject this bill that still comes up too short for too many students. We need to let them succeed in today's global economy and ensure that students have the support that America needs to be competitive and successful.