Brett Guthrie

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. GUTHRIE. I yield myself as much time as I may consume. When we're talking about the $10 billion savings to the deficit and using CBO numbers, the number that we like to talk about, if you look at the overall cost of the budget, CBO numbers in the discretionary side, what this bill would do to the discretionary side, they're transferring money out of the mandatory into the discretionary side for administration. And, also, as we expand Pell Grants, with this bill we will expand Pell Grants, on the mandatory side, which this bill scores, it doesn't score what will happen in the discretionary side. Part of Pell Grants are discretionary, so if you expand Pell Grant applicants in the mandatory side, it is also going to require additional appropriations. And we believe that the admin in the discretionary side plus the expansion of Pell Grants from CBO numbers is $13.5 billion cost to the system, which is more than the $10 billion that we're putting in the deficit reduction now. So we will have to increase more than we're putting in the deficit reduction. The other thing is, these numbers were scored by CBO in March, and the most up-to-date numbers of people participating in the Pell Grants as of August--now that we're here in September--the August numbers believe that it will be $11.4 billion in added Pell Grant costs when using the most up-to-date numbers. And so I think those are real numbers that we can talk about. We are already up to--I guess it's $25 billion of costs that this will have when we're talking about $10 billion in savings. The one thing that wasn't taken into account either--and these are numbers that could come to pass or not, but those first two numbers I think are real. The other is the $33 billion that CBO says hasn't been identified that are market risk to the program. Now, that's market risk: so you could have them, you could not have them, I'll cede that. But I do believe that the discretionary side of Pell and the most up- to-date numbers of Pell do show that it's about a $25 billion cost of the bill. Madam Chairwoman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chairwoman, the purpose of this amendment is twofold: it gives priority for applicants for the Community College Grant Program serving students who are veterans, and it also will allow to expand in energy-related fields. We do not oppose the amendment, and I yield back my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chair, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I am pleased to join Ranking Member Kline in offering this amendment. Our amendment accomplishes key goals for student loan stabilization and reform without gutting a successful public-private partnership. First, this amendment preserves the FFEL program--the Federal Family Education Loan Program. It ensures stability and continuity for both students and schools by extending the Ensuring Continued Access for Student Loans Act, or ECASLA, through 2014, which aligns it with the rest of the Higher Education Act, which Congress reauthorized last year. As long as we're facing a global credit shortage, ECASLA provides a Federal backstop to ensure there is no interruption in funding for students and families. As the market recovers, ECASLA offers the flexibility for private capital to return. In fact, even in today's weakened economy, a substantial portion of loans originated in the FFEL program are made with private capital. We know the ECASLA programs are working on campuses all around the country. We have heard from a group of financial aid administrators who have made it clear that ECASLA is working. You just don't have to talk to financial administrators. I would submit that 4,400 colleges and universities still participate in the FFEL program, and they voted with their feet. If they felt that ECASLA had not been working, they would have joined the Direct Loan Program by now, but they haven't. I've heard from colleges and universities across my district--from large public, State universities to small, independent, private colleges, and they've all shared with me how the FFEL program benefits their students by offering the services of flexibility and choice with additional services. Let's not forget about how this helps students. Second, our amendment will drive down the deficit. ECASLA proves that you can save taxpayer money while preserving an effective program. In fact, we expect to generate $13 billion in savings over the next 5 years. Poll after poll shows that the American people are deeply concerned about the deficit. We should invest in future generations by putting the savings toward deficit reduction. Third, we chart a path for the future by pursuing a comprehensive renewal of student lending. By extending ECASLA through 2014, consistent with other financial aid programs, we create a vital window of opportunity to pursue real student loan reform. Our amendment would create a commission to study the student lending system and would propose a new framework for stable, cost-effective financing. We will remove politics from the discussion and focus on what matters: preserving choice and competition for borrowers; preventing waste, fraud and abuse; maintaining value-added benefits like financial literacy and counseling; ensuring stability even in a weak economy; and retaining private capital, avoiding a massive infliction of debt on future generations. Finally, I would like to point out that our amendment does not create the same long-term entitlement expansions that have been called for in this bill. The issues addressed in the majority's bill are all important. Republicans care about the condition of our schools, about pre-K education, about community colleges, and about their role in developing our workforce, but this is the wrong place and the wrong way to address these challenges. We can invest in students without crippling them with runaway entitlement spending. This is a straightforward amendment based on extending a bipartisan solution. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chairman, the 2014 numbers, when the Higher Education Act is reauthorized--and we feel it would be appropriate to do it--when we have ECASLA in place, when the markets are turning around, when the markets do turn around, the heavy lifting--we were at a unique time last year. I wasn't in the Congress last year when the bipartisan group came together to do ECASLA to preserve, and worked, both Republicans and Democrats together, and should be commended for that. All we are asking is that we continue that until the higher education is authorized, during that time have the commission study and see exactly with what program we should go. We did talk a lot about deficit reduction because, quite frankly, I think that's the most important thing in the country. If we look at CBO numbers, when you say $10 billion in a mandatory spending program, but spend $13.5 billion in a discretionary spending program using CBO numbers, then you are not putting $10 billion to the deficit if you are spending $13.5 billion in discretionary spending, because as the Pell Grants expand on the mandatory side of the aisle, they also expand on the discretionary side. So when a taxpayer sends their dollar to Washington D.C., they don't mark it for discretionary or mandatory, it comes here and it's spent. So the underlying bill, using CBO numbers, I am not going to bring in the market risk, because we can argue that. Some people have asked for $33 billion, we could argue that. But just in real hard numbers, spending, transferring administration in the Pell Grant, discretionary side, says that the underlying bill is a $3.5 billion addition to the deficit. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline).

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Chairman, this amendment may do a number of positive things to improve the bill, but at its heart I still have significant concerns. Specifically, I have concerns about the impact of this bill on the deficit and jobs all across the country. We have heard from the Congressional Budget Office since the introduction of this bill, since the bill was originally scored, that there are a number of hidden costs included. No matter how we look at it, this bill will not save $10 billion over 10 years. In fact, we believe that the cost of this bill is at least $15 billion, a $15 billion cost that will go towards the deficit, not towards deficit reduction. Finally, I am very concerned about the implication on the unemployment rate in my State. We are federalizing one more private sector program and eliminating all the good work being done throughout the country by the private sector. This could mean as many as 30,000 jobs being lost nationwide, approximately 500 in my State, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, all because we decided to kill this program rather than figure out a viable solution. The services being provided by guarantee agencies and lenders will not be continued at nearly the same level when these entities are required to enter into contracts with the Federal Government. We have already seen the impact of these contracts. Earlier this year, the Department of Education contracted out the servicing function of the Direct Loan Program for four servicers. The low contract price ensured that most of these servicers will only be able to provide bare-bones compliance with the law, not the robust services that were previously provided by the private sector. In short, I am very concerned about the true impact of this bill. Unfortunately, we will not recognize the impact until this bill has been implemented, and then it may be too late. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.

Mr. GUTHRIE. I rise in opposition to H.R. 3221 because I believe there's a better way to protect students, colleges, and taxpayers. The authors of this legislation will argue that the purpose of H.R. 3221 is to simply stabilize student lending. They claim the Federal Family Education Loan program, or the FFEL, is on ``life support'' and must be replaced with the government-run Direct Loan Program. The FFEL program has been a stable, reliable source of private capital for student loans for more than 40 years. It provides a choice of loan providers--from large, national lenders to small, local nonprofits--and an array of benefits and services. Colleges and universities overwhelmingly prefer the FFEL, with 70 to 80 percent of schools consistently opting for the public-private option. Dr. Gary Ransdell, president of Western Kentucky University, has told me that the end of the FFEL program would, ``mean the loss of financial literacy programs, college access programs, default aversion programs, borrowing benefits, and other support services.'' Further, Dr. William Huston, president of St. Catharine College, a small, independent private college in my district, has shared his concerns about the impact the policy shift will have on schools of his size. He said the shift, ``would mean investing staff time and money to change systems and processes at a time where budgets have been cut to the core.'' Clearly, the rush to the Direct Loan Program will have a major impact on schools and students. Now, it is true that the FFEL program was hit by the global market collapse that rocked our economy last year--and when that happened, student loan capital dried up, along with the capital across all sectors. And when stability was needed, Congress stepped in. Last year, Congress passed the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act, or ECASLA, which provided a temporary Federal backstop to protect borrowers from loan disruption. This program has worked exceedingly well, and to my knowledge, not a single borrower has been left without a loan. The program is still in place today, and if our goal is simply to stabilize student lending, there is a simple solution: we should extend programs under ECASLA to retain the Federal backstop until the economy rebounds. These programs are working today, which means there would be no confusion for schools and no uncertainty for borrowers if we were to simply extend this program while the market remains turbulent. In fact, Republicans had offered a plan that would exactly do that. Later today I will join Ranking Member Kline to offer an alternative to H.R. 3221. Our plan extends ECASLA through 2014, aligning it with other programs under the Higher Education Act. In the meantime, we are calling for a commission to study student loan programs and propose alternatives that will protect borrowers and taxpayers alike. Simply put, our plan is a way to slow down and take a more thoughtful, reasonable approach to long-term student loan reform. Instead, we're going to vote on a plan that will reshape the way students pay for college in this country and radically expand the Federal Government in the process. Proponents of this bill claim it saves $87 billion for taxpayers.

Mr. GUTHRIE. In reality, that $87 billion is a combination of savings and government earnings that come because the Federal Government charges students a higher interest rate than it costs to borrow, turning student loans into a profit-making venture for the government. And what do we do with this $87 billion? We are taking student money and spending much of it on an array of new government programs. Students and schools will lose the value of choice, competition and innovation. Meanwhile, taxpayers will be on the hook for massive new entitlement spending and a huge expansion in government borrowing to finance loans that now need to be made directly from the Federal Treasury. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``no.''

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chairman, I do think it is a good way to target this funding to assist communities that are affected by Federal decisions in the Base Realignment and Closure, be they positive or negative for those communities. I yield back my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chair, I rise to claim the time in opposition even though I do not oppose the amendment.

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Chairman, supporting our men and women in uniform is important, and so too is it important to support the communities where the military has left an imprint. I think this is a reasonable way of targeting funding, and I will not oppose the amendment. As we try to do what's best for communities, including those impacted by a base closure, we should consider job losses that would come as a result of this underlying bill. I reserve my time.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Junior Achievement of Western Kentucky on their 50th anniversary. This important organization deserves recognition for achieving this milestone. The Junior Achievement of Western Kentucky was established in July of 1959 and has served over 125,000 students in the last half-century. As a partnership between education and business, Junior Achievement helps students understand the economy and better prepare them for their future. The Junior Achievement of Western Kentucky should be proud of their contribution to the community. I commend the organization, students, and volunteers on their 50th anniversary.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Bowling Green Area Chamber of Commerce for being recognized as Chamber of the Year. This acknowledgement was made during the American Chamber of Commerce Executives' annual conference. Through the leadership of Chairman of the Board Todd Davis, President Jim Hizer, and the teamwork of the community, the Bowling Green Area Chamber of Commerce was recognized by their peers for their hard work and achievements. Success in economic development efforts and community programs led to the Chamber being elevated as the top organization in its class. The region's business community has seen tremendous growth due to the leadership programs, educational initiatives, and other opportunities provided by the Chamber to its members. The Bowling Green Area Chamber of Commerce has shown a strong commitment to bringing success and prosperity to the community. I commend the Board of Directors, staff, membership, and volunteers of the Chamber on receiving this prestigious honor.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3326, the Departments of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Brett Guthrie Bill Number: H.R. 3326 Account: RDT&E/Army/Medical Technology Recipient: Owensboro Medical Health System Mitchell Memorial Cancer Center, 811 E. Parrish Avenue, Owensboro, KY 42303 Description of Request: Provide $2,500,000 to continue the hospital's partnership in plant-based pharmaceutical research.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3326, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Brett Guthrie Bill Number: H.R. 3326 Account: RDT&E/DW Recipient: EWA, Inc. 2413 Nashville Road, Suite 126, Bowling Green, KY 42101 Description of Request: Provide $5,000,000 to develop prototypes for the U.S. Special Operation Command to covertly identify and track individuals who threaten the national security of the U.S. Government.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to talk about what I mentioned this last week. Back in the 1982 recession, in my State of Kentucky, we had unemployment rates at the level of over 11 percent. My father lost his job. He was one of those who'd worked for Ford Motor Company, and they closed the plant. Because of what happened in this House back in 1982, that being cutting taxes, cutting spending and putting faith in the American people, my father went from one who had lost his job to one who was starting a business and was becoming a job creator. What has this House done, this Democratic majority, in the last 6 months? They've made it easier to sue businesses; they've raised energy rates on businesses if it has passed the Senate; also, they've put mandates on businesses for health care coverage; and they've instituted an 8 percent payroll tax. I believe we need to cut taxes, cut spending, put faith in the American people, create jobs, and get people working again.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3170, Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act of 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Brett Guthrie Bill Number: H.R. 3170 Account: Small Business Administration Recipient: City of Bardstown, 220 N. 5th Street, Bardstown, KY 40004 Description of Request: Provide $100,000 to replace a water line to further economic development.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3288, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Brett Guthrie Bill Number: H.R. 3288 Account: FTA/Bus and Bus Facilities Recipient: Western Kentucky University, 1906 College Heights Blvd, Bowling Green, KY 42101 Description of Request: Provide $250,000 for the purchase of a new fuel-efficient, hybrid bus to meet the campus' transportation needs.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3288, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Brett Guthrie Bill Number: H.R. 3288 Account: HUD/EDI Recipient: Western Kentucky University, 1906 College Heights Blvd, Bowling Green, KY 42101 Description of Request: Provide $250,000 to assist the business accelerator in their mission to help students, local entrepreneurs, and emerging small businesses access technology to begin their businesses.

Mr. GUTHRIE

Mr. GUTHRIE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3288, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2010. Requesting Member: Congressman Brett Guthrie Bill Number: H.R. 3288 Account: HUD/EDI Recipient: City of Bradfordsville Description of Request: Provide $250,000 to renovate a vacant school for the purposes of a storm shelter, senior center, and community center.