OFFICIALS LEGISLATION INTEREST GROUPS PUBLIC STATEMENTS COMMITTEES VETOES

Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011: Extension of Remarks

Floor Speech

Date: Feb. 18, 2011
Location: Washington, DC
Issues: Education

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Kline amendment, which seeks to short circuit the Department of Education's ongoing rulemaking process regarding the Higher Education Act's ``gainful employment'' requirement for postsecondary programs.

Private sector colleges and universities serve 2.8 million students and receive $32.5 billion in federal student aid. Even more students are enrolled in career training programs at non-profit colleges. These training programs are an important part of our education system and provide a valuable service, particularly to non-traditional students.

Unfortunately, a number of investigations have recently cast light on bad actors in the for-profit sector that have been using deceptive recruiting tactics and inflated job placement and completion rates. All stakeholders in this process--from students seeking a quality education, to citizens insisting their tax dollars are spent responsibly, to the many legitimate programs--have an interest in seeing these abuses stopped.

The Department of Education began a process to define ``gainful employment'' in 2009 and released a proposed rule in July 2010. The plan has sparked intense debate, with more than 90,000 comments, and I urge the Department to continue to engage with all stakeholders and address legitimate concerns as they refine the rule.

However, this amendment would stop the process altogether, ending the dialogue for the rest of the fiscal year. I am also concerned that this amendment would bar enforcement of new rules that require for-profit schools and non-degree programs to disclose basic program information, like graduation rates, program costs, and median loan debt for graduates, to prospective applicants.

Mr. Chair, if the final rule from the Department of Education does not meet the goal of rooting out bad actors while preserving access to high quality postsecondary education, this body should--and I believe will--step in and make changes. But the Department is attempting to address an important issue: stopping taxpayer funding to sub-par programs that leave students nowhere but deeper in debt. Congress should not cut off that process midway through.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward