[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 147 (Wednesday, September 5, 2018)] [House] [Pages H7834-H7838] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1635, EMPOWERING STUDENTS THROUGH ENHANCED FINANCIAL COUNSELING ACT, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4606, ENSURING SMALL SCALE LNG CERTAINTY AND ACCESS ACT Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1049 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1049 Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1635) to amend the loan counseling requirements under the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. No amendment to the bill shall be in order except those printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Sec. 2. At any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4606) to provide that applications under the Natural Gas Act for the importation or exportation of small volumes of natural gas shall be granted without modification or delay. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Wyoming is recognized for 1 hour. {time} 1215 Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, during consideration of this resolution all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. General Leave Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Wyoming? There was no objection. Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 1049, which provides a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, and a structured rule for H.R. 1635, the Empowering Students Through Enhanced Financial Counseling Act. These bipartisan bills provide commonsense changes that will strengthen our economy by removing unnecessary regulatory burdens and improving financial counseling for our students. Student loan debt in our country hit a record high of $1.5 trillion in the first quarter of this year, Mr. Speaker. Furthermore, both the number and size of student loans are increasing, while the repayment rates are decreasing. Students are not receiving the proper counseling when they enroll in Federal aid programs. This has the potential to cost them immense amounts of money. Right now, schools are only required to provide entry and exit financial counseling to students who receive Federal loans. Often, the counseling offered does not give students a realistic understanding of their anticipated finances and income during their studies and after graduation, or information about other Federal aid programs they could turn to before a private loan. By enhancing the financial counseling offered and expanding it to students who receive Pell grants and to the parents of students who take out Federal loans to pay for their children's education, students will better be able to manage their finances and maximize their opportunities, saving themselves and the taxpayers money every single year. Mr. Speaker, we provide over $120 billion of Federal student aid every year, without providing adequate education and support about how to use those funds. This must change. With this bill, we will begin to give our students the tools and resources necessary to ensure they put themselves in the best financial position for the future. H.R. 1635 does just that. Additionally, the rule we are considering today makes in order several bipartisan amendments that are aimed at making this good bill even better. The rule that we are debating this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, also provides for consideration of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act. This rule makes in order two Democrat amendments to this bipartisan bill which also will help strengthen our economy and create more American jobs. Mr. Speaker, as you know, the United States is now the world's leading producer of oil and natural gas. And my home State of Wyoming ranks sixth in production of crude oil, and eighth in natural gas production. However, despite the important and even monumental efforts by the Trump administration so far, uncertainty and burdensome regulations still stifle operations and further growth. Currently, the Natural Gas Act does not specify an amount threshold for the Department of Energy's lengthy regulatory process for the exportation of liquefied natural gas. This means that producers wanting to export a small amount of gas are forced to go through the same process as major producers. By providing greater regulatory certainty and a clear timetable for the [[Page H7835]] process of exporting small amounts of LNG, we will better enable exporters to move forward with capital-intensive projects that create American jobs. We also are able, Mr. Speaker, through this bill, to preserve existing environmental laws and ensure that small-scale export facilities receive the proper review. Wyoming's petroleum industry directly employs over 7,000 people, with an annual payroll of over $668 million, contributing over $900 million to our economy. The small scale LNG export market is a growing sector of our economy with immense potential that can further expand the economic benefits the petroleum industry yields to my State and to the Nation. This bill will open up markets where large-scale exports are simply not economical and help jump-start growth in this important industry. H.R. 4606 places small-scale exports on a level playing field with exports to free trade agreement nations. Many of our neighboring countries are forced to rely on unstable or unfriendly nations for their energy needs because the regulations we currently place on our small-scale LNG exporters makes exporting to these nations uneconomical. Mr. Speaker, by reducing these regulations, U.S. LNG exports can play an important role in rebuilding parts of the Caribbean devastated by hurricanes in 2017, as well as provide a stable source of energy. It will also prevent our neighbors from having to turn, potentially, to our adversaries to meet their energy needs. Mr. Speaker, we are in the midst of an energy boom that is revitalizing our economy. It is also putting us in a position where we can greatly assist our neighbor countries by providing them a stable source of energy and offering support in the event of a natural disaster. The current unnecessary and overly burdensome regulations on small LNG exporters prevent us from taking full advantage of this unprecedented growth in our energy production and industry. H.R. 4606 allows us to address this issue and to provide an additional boost to our economy. Mr. Speaker, the bills that will be considered under this rule are bipartisan bills that will help strengthen our economy and support our students. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this rule that will allow consideration of H.R. 4606 and H.R. 1635, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. As we return to the Capitol this week, there remains countless crises which demand our attention: children still separated from their families; children being murdered on school grounds, while this body stands idly by doing nothing, turning a blind eye to gun violence. We have trade wars started by this President which are raising the cost of businesses in our communities and putting some companies out of business. Finally, the government runs out of funding at the end of the month, the end of this month, Mr. Speaker. We find ourselves facing yet another Republican government shutdown. But instead of funding the government and averting a shutdown, the majority has decided that these two bills are the best use of our time. That is right. The majority believes that the best use of what precious legislative time remains, 10 days, is to codify a DOE rulemaking that was just recently finalized. Why don't we provide some meaningful oversight over this administration? We have agency after agency attacking our Nation's workers, students, homeowners, and the health of our environment. We have a President who is starting trade wars and, reportedly, is itching to start real wars. But instead, all the majority is interested in doing is bringing unnecessary bills on the margins, such as the ones that we are considering today. The first bill, H.R. 4606, will codify into law a Department of Energy rulemaking that went into effect less than 3 weeks ago. H.R. 4606 is a solution in search of a problem. The current approval process is working. However, by enshrining this rule into law, the majority is, in essence, saying that all small scale exports of LNG are always and will always be in the public's interest and will continue to be so. This is shortsighted and, if it turns out to be wrong, it will be much harder to correct this policy once it becomes law than if it were to remain a current DOE rule. In addition, we are considering H.R. 1635, the Empowering Students Through Enhanced Financial Counseling Act. I wish to credit my Republican colleagues. This is a bipartisan bill. This is an example of what can be done when bills are given full hearings, a markup, and represent the consensus of the people's House. Unfortunately, the benefits of this bill are mitigated by actions from this administration that make it harder for students. For example, this past February, Republicans on the Education and the Workforce Committee passed the PROSPER Act. The so-called PROSPER Act is a highly partisan reauthorization of the Higher Education Act that cuts nearly $15 billion from Federal student aid, leaving students with more expensive loans that are more difficult to repay; more expensive loans for young Americans with the highest interest rates in nearly a decade. And just last week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's student loan ombudsman, whose job was to protect student borrowers from predatory lending practices, resigned, resigned from his position. In his resignation letter, Seth Frotman wrote that the Trump administration has ``turned its back on young people and their financial futures.'' Mr. Frotman also stated that under the leadership of Acting Director Mulvaney, ``. . . the Bureau has abandoned the very consumers it is tasked by Congress with protecting'' and that Director Mulvaney has ``. . . used the Bureau to serve the wishes of the most powerful financial companies in America,'' not surprising to me. Mr. Frotman wrote that the Bureau has failed student loan borrowers. While this bill may help, H.R. 1635, in no way, reverses the damage this administration has caused our students. Congress is supposed to be a check on the administration, not a rubber stamp. The rule we are considering makes in order two amendments to H.R. 4606 and seven amendments in order to H.R. 1635. I am deeply disappointed that my two amendments were not made in order to H.R. 1635. My amendments would have helped students who have suffered from the closure of schools or school branches. When schools close, it is the students who are the real losers. They are saddled with debt and left having to navigate a complicated process for loan relief. {time} 1230 The two amendments I offered would have streamlined the process for students to have their loans discharged, ensuring that bureaucracy didn't slow down providing these students the relief that they need, and fixed the Pell grant process to make sure that students wouldn't be limited in pursuing their educational goals at a new institution. These are bipartisan ideas, which have been reviewed by the current administration. I am disappointed that the House wouldn't even allow an open process; however, I am certainly not surprised. After all, this is the most closed Congress in our Nation's history. I hope that we can aim to do better and give our constituents a real debate in this House. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Rules Committee, Mrs. Torres, for her comments today. I think that Mrs. Torres and I both agree that Congress needs to ensure that we are playing our constitutional role, and that is why I find it particularly surprising that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to further empower the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is a completely unaccountable and, I would argue, unconstitutional agency. In fact, statutorily, Mr. Speaker, with the regulation of student loans under the Higher Education Act, Congress has charged the Department of [[Page H7836]] Education with this obligation and responsibility, not the CFPB, and that is where we think it should belong. We don't think that the answer to congressional oversight and to increasing congressional oversight is to give further power to a completely unaccountable Federal agency. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins). Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act. Mr. Speaker, the United States is currently experiencing an energy renaissance. Liquefied natural gas production, or LNG, in the United States is playing a major role in the changing of the international landscape, with America now leading the way in innovative new LNG technologies and becoming a major energy exporter. I am proud to say that much of this national accomplishment comes as a result of the contributions of many LNG endeavors based in my district in south Louisiana. The success we are currently experiencing is just the beginning. During this Congress, we have worked with the Trump administration to roll back many of the previous administration's regulations that injured American industry. In fact, the previous executive branch, in many ways, actually weaponized Federal agencies against the oil and gas industry. Conservatives in this Congress have worked to implement commonsense reforms like the legislation we are considering today to revive the American energy industry and bring energy security to our Nation. H.R. 4606 would provide for the expeditious consideration of NEPA exclusion applications to import and export small quantities of natural gas. This is a needed reform that will help encourage economic development and create jobs. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support today's combined rule that includes this legislation and to support the full measure when it comes to the floor for a final vote. Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as the cost to attend college has continued to rise, so has the amount of debt students and their parents have had to take on. According to the Federal Reserve, the outstanding loan debt stands at approximately $1.5 trillion and climbing. This debt load has hampered the ability of young graduates to buy their first home, a car, or start a small business. Congress needs to do more to help students and their parents deal with the student loan crisis. This is why I rise today to offer my colleagues on the other side of the aisle the opportunity to pass a comprehensive bill to ensure that every student has a path to a debt- free degree or credential that leads to a rewarding career. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 6543, the Aim Higher Act. This thoughtful proposal invests in our students, making higher education more affordable while also addressing the rising costs of college. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from California? There was no objection. Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) to discuss our proposal. Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Torres for her leadership and Ms. Cheney for her hard work on the Rules Committee. Mr. Speaker, in 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson signed the Higher Education Act, he said that it meant ``that a high school senior anywhere in this great land of ours can apply to any college or any university in any of the 50 States and not be turned away because their family is poor.'' Unfortunately, 53 years later, the promise of an affordable education is out of reach for millions of students. In May of this year, America's outstanding student loan debt surpassed $1.5 trillion. With the cost of college education and the debt needed to afford it growing each year, Americans are demanding action to lower the crushing costs of higher education; and thus it is imperative that we pass a comprehensive update to the Higher Education Act which deals with the full menu of Federal policy that will keep higher education affordable. Unfortunately, the majority has failed to bring HEA to the floor in that long overdue rewrite, and today we are only left with the Financial Counseling bill that we are going to vote on, which is just a sliver of what we need to do to build America's future workforce. In 2008, the last HEA was negotiated under then-Chairman George Miller and passed the House and Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. Fast-forward to last December, the majority introduced the misnamed PROSPER Act, a misguided attempt to update HEA that guts $15 billion from Federal student aid and diverts taxpayer money to low- quality, predatory programs. Unlike 2008, this bill squeaked out of the Education and Workforce Committee on a party-line vote. Fortunately, that bill has not seen the light of day ever since. In the absence of any movement on a long overdue update of HEA, I am pleased to report that committee Democrats stepped into this vacuum and introduced the Aim Higher Act, a comprehensive approach to higher education. Under the Aim Higher Act, every student will have the opportunity to earn a quality, debt-free degree or credential that leads to a rewarding career. This bill makes a number of changes to higher education to make degrees more affordable and easier to pay off. It provides 2 years of tuition-free community college to every high school graduate through Federal-State partnerships, incentivizes States to reinvest in their 4- year public colleges and universities, and makes Federal financial aid more generous to keep pace with increased tuition costs. Additionally, knowing that 4-year college isn't for everyone and that our workforce needs are changing, our bill allows students to use their Pell grants for quality, short-term certificate programs that provide an accelerated path to the workforce. As I mentioned before, our student loan debt is at the highest level it has ever been, $1.5 trillion. That is the highest amount of consumer debt outside of mortgages. This debt burden is a drag not on just the student graduate or a family, it is a drag on our entire economy that impacts when or if a buyer can buy a home, start a family, get a small business off the ground, or change careers. Today, many interest rates for student loans are often far higher than other consumer borrowing, yet, like other forms of debt, student loans cannot be refinanced as interest rates drop, saddling 25 million borrowers with thousands of dollars in extra debt. Our bill fixes that and will allow students to refinance their loans to more affordable rates. Looking at the nationwide shortage of teachers and primary care doctors, our bill preserves the effective Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, which the PROSPER Act abolished, to encourage talented individuals to pursue careers in high-need fields. It also expands the program to address challenges in our farming communities, where the average farmer age is now 58 years old and new farmers entering the field have drooped by 20 percent. The Aim Higher Act isn't just focused on cutting the cost of higher education; it is also focused on improving the quality of higher education. It cracks down on predatory institutions that waste student and taxpayer money by peddling expensive, low-quality programs. Our veterans who have earned their GI Bill benefits through service and sacrifice are frequent targets and victims of fraudulent schools, as Mrs. Holly Petraeus, the wife of General David Petraeus, crisscrossed America a couple years ago as a representative of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau to warn veterans of these rip-offs. And finally, the Aim Higher Act gives students the tools they need to [[Page H7837]] graduate on time. We invest in campus childcare for student parents, subsidized housing for homeless and foster youth, faculty training for students with disabilities, and community centers to help student veterans transition to civilian life. Policy is defined by priorities. Instead of spending limited resources on a tax cut for those who don't need it, we believe that we should invest in our children and in the future of our economy. That is what the Aim Higher Act does. Mr. Speaker, I hope you will join us in pushing for a higher education system that puts the promise of quality, debt-free degrees and a rewarding career within the reach of all Americans. Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson). Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank Madam Chairwoman for recognizing me. Mr. Speaker, I represent rural eastern and southeastern Ohio, which is no stranger to the benefits of natural gas. It sits on top of the Utica and Marcellus shale plays, which have led to a growing interest in new and exciting manufacturing opportunities, like ethane cracker plants and ethane storage hubs. Those opportunities have become viable thanks to new technologies that have led to an increase in natural gas production. But that increased production has also been the result of the growing demand for excess U.S. natural gas. H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, will help ensure the United States takes full advantage of our opportunities for excess small scale LNG exports, along with encouraging production opportunities here at home. Specifically, this bipartisan bill provides that applications under the Natural Gas Act for the importation or exportation of small volumes of natural gas, that being defined as 0.14 billion cubic feet per day, shall be granted without delay, but only if they do not require an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act. Despite the U.S. being the world's leading producer of oil and natural gas, American companies are unable to efficiently export small quantities of gas to neighboring countries. By reducing regulatory constraints and codifying a similar rule issued by the Department of Energy, H.R. 4606 will better allow our domestic providers the opportunity to provide a stable source of U.S. energy to countries currently reliant on Venezuelan fuel oil, which has been used to gain influence in countries in the Caribbean and Central and South America. This effort to increase U.S. energy opportunities within the region is not new, as the previous administration also sought to increase energy engagement through the creation of the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative. As many independent and DOE-commissioned studies have confirmed, the benefits of natural gas exports are clear. They are a net positive to our domestic economy, but that is not the only benefit. As Puerto Rico continues to rebuild after the devastating hurricane in 2017, increased shipments and availability of reliable U.S. natural gas can help the island meet its energy needs. Additionally, LNG exports can only serve to strengthen U.S. ties with countries throughout the region. With U.S. natural gas reserves as large as they are and with new technological advancements allowing our producers to access an increasing amount of natural gas each and every day, it is imperative that the U.S. take full advantage of this abundant resource and the economic benefits it provides here at home. H.R. 4606 is a step in that direction. It will strengthen U.S. geopolitical ties, increase job creation, and promote economic growth as a result. Mr. Speaker, I encourage everyone to vote for this rule and this commonsense underlying bill. {time} 1245 Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. The House is currently scheduled to be in session for just 10 days before funding for the government runs out--10 days. And while the House has passed partisan appropriation bills, none of them have been signed into law. If Congress fails to act, it will be the third time the government has shut down in 2018 alone--the third time. Let me remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that the Republican Party is in charge of the House. The Republican Party is in charge of the Senate and the White House. President Trump is again playing games, and without leadership from this House and our colleagues in the Senate, his desire for a government shutdown will cause real people pain and hurt our growing economy. Three thousand Federal workers in my district have heard President Trump tell them that they are the reason that we are in debt. Three thousand workers in my district and 2 million nationally are wondering if they will be furloughed, while corporations and millionaires get massive tax cuts. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question and the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I again would like to thank my colleague from the Rules Committee for her work and her participation in this debate. I hope that the minority leader of the United States Senate, Mr. Schumer, might have been listening to her arguments just now, and I would just recall for our colleagues that it was the Democrats in the Senate, led by Mr. Schumer, who shut the government down earlier this year, not the Republicans. Mr. Speaker, it was the Democrats in the House and the Senate who walked away from the negotiations on the budget deal that we finally were able to strike, but not before they refused to show up for at least one meeting at the White House. So it is the case that the Republicans are in control of this body. It is the case that we have a majority in the Senate. As my colleague knows, we don't have 60 votes in the Senate, and so Mr. Schumer and the Democrats in the Senate are able to gum up the works pretty extensively. But as for us in the House, we have, Mr. Speaker, been successful in passing all 12 appropriations bills. We have been successful in passing the necessary appropriations bills without the help of the Democrats in order to make sure that we are providing the funds that we need to keep the government open and keep the government functioning. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to participate in a good-faith manner, particularly in the coming weeks as we deal with the Defense Appropriations bill once again on this floor, and just remind them how important it is that we make sure that our men and women in uniform receive the funds that they deserve. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank both the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson) and my colleague from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) for their important and hard work on these bills. We must continue to roll back the regulatory burdens that make doing business in our country so difficult. We also have to give our students the tools they need to maximize their opportunities for success and to understand the financial liabilities that they are undertaking when they receive these student loans. We don't want them to have a future that is diminished by the burden of unnecessary debt that they can't repay once they graduate. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the rule and passage of the underlying bills. The material previously referred to by Mrs. Torres is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 1049 Offered by Ms. Torres At the end of the resolution, add the following new sections: Sec. 3. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution the Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6543) to amend and strengthen the Higher Education Act of 1965 so that every student has a path to a quality, debt-free degree or credential that leads to a rewarding career. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to [[Page H7838]] the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then on the next legislative day the House shall, immediately after the third daily order of business under clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the bill. Sec. 4. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 6543. The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating. Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or control the consideration of the subject before the House being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first recognition.'' The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution. . . . [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition, page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering the previous question. That Member, because he then controls the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for the purpose of amendment.'' In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of Representatives, the subchapter titled ``Amending Special Rules'' states: ``a refusal to order the previous question on such a rule [a special rule reported from the Committee on Rules] opens the resolution to amendment and further debate.'' (Chapter 21, section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: ``Upon rejection of the motion for the previous question on a resolution reported from the Committee on Rules, control shifts to the Member leading the opposition to the previous question, who may offer a proper amendment or motion and who controls the time for debate thereon.'' Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Republican majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan. Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. ____________________