2015: Schweikert Voted Against The FY 2016 Conference Report Budget Resolution, Which Assumes Savings From The In-School Interest Subsidy, Repeal Of The Expansion Of Income-Driven Repayment And Elimination Of Public-Sector Loan Forgiveness. In April 2015, Schweikert voted against the FY 2016 Conference Report budget resolution which, according to Congressional Quarterly, "reflects the current post-sequester caps on discretionary spending - $523 billion for defense and $493.5 billion for non-defense programs in fiscal 2016. Raising the caps would require a change in law." According to the Washington Post, "There is no explicit language in the budget resolution calling for cuts to other higher education programs, but there is a broad reduction of mandatory spending that will impact such programs. And House Republicans have made it clear which ones they have in mind. During a budget markup in March, Republican Budget Committee Policy Director Jane Lee said the budget assumes savings from the end of the in-school interest subsidy on student loans, the repeal of the expansion of an income-driven repayment program and the elimination of public-sector loan forgiveness." The vote was on the Conference Report; the Conference Report passed by a vote of 226 to 197. The Senate also passed the budget resolution. [House Vote 183, 4/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 5/5/15; Washington Post, 5/7/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11]
Low Income Students Would Be Squeezed By The Elimination Of The Subsidized Stafford Loan. According to the Washington Post, "Lower income students would be squeezed by the end of subsidized Stafford loans, on which the government pays the interest while the borrower is in school. The Education Department estimates that as of the end of December over 28 million borrowers received these loans." [Washington Post, 5/7/15]
Expanded Income-Driven Repayment Caps A Borrower's Monthly Bill At 10 Percent, Repeal Of Expansion Could Double Some Borrowers Monthly Payment. According to the Washington Post, "The resolution also calls for the reversal of President Obama's expansion of a student loan program that caps a borrower's monthly bill at 10 percent of income and forgives the debt after 20 years of payment. That income-driven plan, known as Pay As You Earn (PAYE), is part of a suite of repayment options that's supposed to prevent borrowers from defaulting on their loans, a problem faced by about 20 percent of people repaying college debt. [...] An analysis by TICAS concludes that the Republican budget could double the student loan payments of borrowers enrolling in PAYE. If someone owing $29,000 in federal student loans and earning $35,000 a year enrolled in the program, for example, that person's initial payment could increase from $145 a month under the current program to $217 a month under the reduced program." [Washington Post, 5/7/15]
Resolution Also Calls On Lawmakers To Repeal The Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program Which Incentives Careers That Serve The Public. According to the Washington Post, 'The budget resolution also calls on lawmakers to get rid of Public Service Loan Forgiveness, which forgives any remaining student loan debt for borrowers who work in the public sector for 10 years. Advocacy groups have argued that the program, created in 2007, is an incentive for students to pursue careers, like public interest law or teaching, that serve the public but may not earn a lot of money. According to the Education Department, some 600,000 borrowers could qualify for the public sector program through fiscal year 2025." [Washington Post, 5/7/15]
President Obama's Budget Capped Public Service Loan Forgiveness at $57,500. According to US News, "The president's proposal would make Pay As You Earn the only income-driven plan available for borrowers moving forward, but it would also enforce stricter limits on benefits. Graduate student loan borrowers with balances of $57,500 and higher would be eligible for forgiveness after 25 years of payment, not 20, and the amount eligible for public service forgiveness would be capped at $57,500. Also, any payments made under non-income-driven plans would not count toward public service loan forgiveness." [US News, 2/11/15]
2015: Schweikert Voted Against The FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Recommends Repealing Mandatory Spending Provisions For The Income-Based Repayment Program's 2010 Expansion And Eliminate The Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. In March 2015, Schweikert voted against the FY 2016 budget resolution which calls for eliminating certain funding for the 2010 expansion of the Income-Based Repayment Program. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Other proposals recommended by the committee report include the following: [...] Repeal certain mandatory education funding made available under the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2010 (including expansion of the Income-Based Repayment program), eliminate in-school interest subsidies for undergraduate students and terminate the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program." The vote was on the budget resolution. The House passed the resolution 228 to 199. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 142, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Schweikert Voted Against A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Recommends Repealing Mandatory Spending Provisions For The Income-Based Repayment Program's 2010 Expansion And Eliminated The Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. In March 2015, Schweikert voted against a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which calls for eliminating certain funding for the 2010 expansion of the Income-Based Repayment Program. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Other proposals recommended by the committee report include the following: [...] Repeal certain mandatory education funding made available under the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2010 (including expansion of the Income-Based Repayment program), eliminate in-school interest subsidies for undergraduate students and terminate the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program." The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House passed the amendment 219 to 208 and later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 141, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 86; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Schweikert Voted For A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Recommends Repealing Mandatory Spending Provisions For The Income-Based Repayment Program's 2010 Expansion And Eliminate The Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which calls for eliminating certain funding for the 2010 expansion of the Income-Based Repayment Program. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Other proposals recommended by the committee report include the following: [...] Repeal certain mandatory education funding made available under the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2010 (including expansion of the Income-Based Repayment program), eliminate in-school interest subsidies for undergraduate students and terminate the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program." The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House rejected the amendment 105 to 319. The House later adopted a substitute amendment identical to this except for a change in defense spending and then later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 140, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/30/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 85; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2017: Schweikert Voted Against Exempting Regulations Related To Consumer Protections On Student Loan From The SCRUB Act, Which Would Require Agencies To Eliminate Old Rules In Order To Create New Ones. In March 2017, Schweikert voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "exempt[ed] from the bill's provisions rules related to providing consumer protections for student loan borrowers." The underlying legislation, also according to Congressional Quarterly, "establish[ed] a nine-member commission to review existing federal regulations and identify regulations that should be repealed on the basis of reducing costs on the U.S. economy. The commission would identify those regulatory policies that should be repealed immediately, and would set up a 'Cut-Go' system that would require agencies to repeal existing rules to offset costs before issuing a new rule. The measure, as amended, would require the commission to review a rule or regulation's unfunded mandate, whether the rule or regulation limits or prevents government agencies from adopting technology to improve efficiency, and the rule or regulation's impact on wage growth, when determining if the rule or regulation should be repealed." The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 191 to 235. [House Vote 109, 3/1/17; Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/17; Congressional Quarterly, 1/7/16; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 52; Congressional Actions, H.R. 998]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Discharging Student Loans When A Student Dies Or Becomes Permanently Disabled. In May 2021, Schweikert voted against the Comprehensive Debt Collection Improvement Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require lenders to discharge private education loans when a student borrower dies or is permanently disabled, including for any cosigners of the loan." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 215-207. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 141, 5/13/21; Congressional Quarterly, 5/13/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2547]
2013: Schweikert Voted For Increasing Student Loan Interest Rates From 3.4 Percent To 6.8 Percent As Part Of The FY 2014 Ryan Budget. In March 2013, Schweikert voted for increasing student loan interest rates from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to Education Votes, "[T]he Ryan plan [...] would allow student loan interest rates on new Stafford loans to double this July, from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent." The resolution passed the House by a vote of 221 to 207, but died in the Senate. [House Vote 88, 3/21/13; Education Votes, 3/20/13; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 25]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Eliminate Interest-Subsidized Federal Loans For Undergraduate Students, As Part Of Rep. Paul Ryan's Budget Proposal. In April 2014, Schweikert voted to eliminate federal in-school interest subsidies for undergraduate student loans, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2015 to 2024. According to the House Budget Committee Fiscal Year 2015 "Path to Prosperity": "Accept the Fiscal Commission's Proposal to Eliminate In-School Interest Subsidies for Undergraduate Students. The federal government focuses aid decisions on family income prior to a student's enrollment and then provides a number of repayment protections and, in some cases, loan forgiveness after graduation. There is no evidence that in-school interest subsidies are critical to individual matriculation." The House adopted the budget resolution by a vote of 219 to 205, but the Senate did not. [House Vote 177, 4/10/14; House Budget Committee, 4/1/14; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 96]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Eliminate Subsidies For Undergraduate Student Loans. In March 2013, Schweikert voted to support eliminating subsidies on undergraduate student loans, as part of the Republican Study Committee's proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the Republican Study Committee, "The Budget Control Act of 2011 ended in school subsidies for graduate students, and the RSC budget proposes a policy that would end in school subsidies for undergraduate students. This would save $54 billion over ten years." The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC's proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 104 to 132 with 171 Democrats voting present. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Repeating a strategy from last year, 171 Democrats voted "present" to push Republicans to vote against the RSC plan to make sure it did not have enough support to replace the Ryan plan." [House Vote 86, 3/21/13; Republican Study Committee, 3/18/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/13; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 35; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 25]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Issue New Federal Student Loans At Fixed Rates Set Each Year Based On Market Conditions, But With A Cap On The Maximum Rate. In July 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "would set federal student loan interest rates issued after July 1, 2013 to the Treasury Department's 10-year borrowing rate, plus 2.05 percent for subsidized and unsubsidized undergraduate loans, 3.6 percent for graduate loans and 4.6 percent for PLUS loans. The loan rates would be capped at 8.25 percent, 9.5 percent and 10.5 percent, respectively." This vote was on a motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment to the bill. The motion passed by a vote of 392 to 31. The amended bill was then signed into law by the president. [House Vote 426, 7/31/13; Congressional Quarterly, 7/24/13; Public Law 113-28, 8/9/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1911]
Before Bill, Federal Student Loan Rates Had Been Set At 3.4 Percent Since July, 2011, But Had Risen To 6.8 Percent On July 1. According to Congressional Quarterly, "In September 2007, Congress enacted the College Cost Reduction Act (PL 110-84), which overhauled federal student aid programs, primarily by reducing the federal subsidies paid to private lenders that offer federally backed student loans and redirecting the savings to enhance other student aid programs. Among other things, the law set fixed interest rates for federally subsidized, undergraduate student loans, which previously had been tied to economic factors and were increasing at the time. Specifically, interest rates on the popular Stafford loan programs were reduced for new loans, dropping to 6% on July 1, 2009, and gradually declining to 3.4% on July 1, 2011. The lower interest rates were initially set to expire July 1, 2012, and were supposed to increase to 6.8% for student loans originated on or after that date. To prevent that increase during the 2012 presidential campaign, Congress last year enacted the Interest Rate Reduction Act as part of the surface transportation authorization law. [...] The student loan provisions of that law extended the 3.4% interest rate for new, federally subsidized, undergraduate student loans for another year, through June 30, 2013." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13]
Under Final Legislation And Treasury Note Rate At Time, Interest Rate On Federal Undergraduate Student Loans Issued From July 1, 2013 To June 1, 2014 Would Be Fixed 3.86 Percent Loans. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Specifically, [the final legislation] ties the interest rates for all federal student loans (except Perkins loans) issued on or after July 1, 2013, to 10-year Treasury notes --- with rates for subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans to be set each year at the 10-year Treasury note plus 2.05%, rates for graduate loans to be set at the 10-year note plus 3.6% and rates for parent PLUS loans to be set at the 10-year note plus 4.6%. [...] Rates each year would be determined on June 1, with the Treasury note rate being set by the most recent Treasury auction (therefore, all loan rates this year would be based off the 1.81% 10-year Treasury rate from May). Those rates would remain in effect for the 12-month period beginning July 1 --- and loans made to students during that period would remain at that same interest rate for the life of the loan." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13]
April 2013: Obama Administration Proposed Changing System To Fixed Interest Rate Loans Set Based On Market Conditions When The Loan Is Issued. According to the President's FY 2014 Budget, "Under current law, interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans are slated to rise this summer from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. At a time when the economy is still recovering and market interest rates remain low, the Budget proposes a cost-neutral reform to set interest rates so they more closely follow market rates, and to provide students with more affordable re-payment options. The rate on new loans would be set each year based on a market interest rate, which would remain fixed for the life of the loan so that student borrowers would have certainty about the rates they would pay. The Budget also expands repayment options to ensure that student borrowers do not have to pay more than 10 percent of their discretionary income on loan payments." [Office of Management and Budget, 4/10/13]
Republicans Supportive Of Administration Proposal, But Democrats Opposed Due To Lack Of Interest Rate Cap. According to Congressional Quarterly, "President Obama, as part of his FY 2014 budget, proposed returning student loan interest rates to a system of market-based variable rates tagged to 10-year Treasury notes. [...] Congressional Republicans expressed support for the concept, while Democrats generally were critical of the proposal because it failed to cap interest rates." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13]
May 2013: House Passed Student Loan Legislation Which Would Have Set Up System Of Adjustable Interest Rate Loans, Based On Market Conditions, Capped At 8.5 Percent For Undergraduate Loans, 10.5 Percent For Graduate And PLUS Loans. According to Congressional Quarterly, "In May, the House passed the Smarter Solutions for Students Act (HR 1911) by a vote of 221 to 198. Similar to the president's proposal, it would tie the interest rates for all federal student loans (except Perkins loans) issued on or after July 1, 2013, to 10-year Treasury notes --- with rates for subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans to be set each year at the 10-year Treasury note plus 2.5% and rates for graduate and parent PLUS loans to be set at the 10-year note plus 4.5%. Overall interest rates would be capped at 8.5% and 10.5%, respectively. Under the House-passed bill, the interest rates on loans taken out by students each year would "float" and be reset each subsequent year for the life of the loan to reflect any increases or decreases in rates." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13]
Obama Administration Threatened A Veto Of House Legislation Due To Adjustable Rates And Because It Proposed Using Proceeds From Higher Interest Rates To Reduce Deficit. According to Congressional Quarterly, "While the Administration welcomes action by the House on this issue, H.R. 1911 is the wrong approach. First, the bill would not guarantee low rates for today's students. A rate that continues to vary after the loan has already been taken out would create uncertainty and lessen transparency for students and their families who are making decisions about borrowing for college. Second, the bill's changes would impose the largest interest rate increases on low- and middle-income students and families who struggle most to afford a college education. Third, the bill does not include the President's proposal to extend repayment options to borrowers who have already left school and often face the same debt burdens as current and future students. Finally, the Administration believes that student loan interest rates should not be raised to reduce the deficit. If the President were presented with this legislation in its current form, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill" (underline omitted). [Office of Management and Budget, 5/22/13]
July 2013: Bipartisan Group Of Senators Negotiated Agreement With White House, This Vote Was On The Legislation Representing That Agreement. According to Congressional Quarterly, "A bipartisan group of senators then began trying to negotiate a compromise, even as the interest rate on Stafford loans returned to 6.8% on July 1. Those negotiators, with the participation of the White House, eventually reached agreement the week of July 15, and it was introduced as a separate bill (S 1334) on July 18. The administration on July 24 released a Statement of Administration Policy expressing strong support for the agreement, and later that same day the Senate adopted it by a 81-18 vote as a substitute to the House bill after rejecting modifications proposed by liberal Democrats." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13]
Obama Administration Strongly Supported Final Senate Legislation. According to the Office of Management and Budget, "The Administration strongly supports Senate passage of the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 1911. [...] It would reduce interest rates for nearly 11 million borrowers taking out new loans this school year, including those who borrowed since the rates rose on July 1st. Also, it would cut rates on all types of borrowers this year, including those for undergraduates taking out unsubsidized Stafford loans, graduate students, and parent borrowers. The Senate amendment does not contain the flaws that were in some of the previous legislative efforts to address this issue. In particular, the amendment rejects a variable interest rate that resets every year, which would put students at risk of paying more over time. Instead, it would give borrowers the certainty of a fixed interest rate on each loan to eliminate the risk of being burdened with additional costs, and would provide firm caps on how high interest rates on new student loans can rise in the future. The amendment also rejects unfair and unwise approaches that would raise student loan interest rates to pay for deficit reduction." [Office of Management and Budget, 7/24/13]
2020: Schweikert Voted Against Overturning A Trump Administration Rule That Rolled Back Protections For Student Loan Borrowers. In June 2020, Schweikert voted against overriding President Trump's veto on a joint resolution that would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide for congressional disapproval of a September 2019 Education Department rule establishing new policies related to federal student loan forgiveness for borrowers who attended schools that committed fraud or any type of institutional misrepresentation, requiring such borrowers to demonstrate financial harm as a result of the fraud to receive complete or partial cancellation of student loan debt. The rule would also allow for mandatory arbitration agreements related to such claims and require borrowers to file claims within three years of leaving an institution. The rule is currently scheduled to go into effect on July 1, 2020. Under the provisions of the joint resolution, the 2019 rule would have no force or effect, and October 2016 rules that provide for complete cancellation of federal student loan debt for defrauded borrowers would be effectively maintained." The vote was on passage over President Trump's veto. The House failed to override the President's veto by a vote of 238-173. [House Vote 120, 6/26/20; Congressional Quarterly, 6/26/20; Congressional Actions, H.J.Res.76]
The Resolution Would Overturn A Trump Administration Rule That Made It More Difficult To Grant Loan Forgiveness To Students Who Were Defrauded By A University. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The Education Department rule in question sets a tougher standard for eliminating student debt when students argue they were defrauded by a university. The rule would require defrauded borrowers to demonstrate financial harm as a result of the fraud in order to have their debt partially or completely canceled, and it would allow for mandatory arbitration agreements related to such claims and require borrowers to file claims within three years of leaving an institution." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/16/20]
Republicans Believed The Obama Rule Is Overreaching, While Democrats Argued The Trump Rule Puts Too Much Of A Burden On Defrauded Students. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The rule, set to take effect July 1, would replace a 2016 Obama administration rule that Republicans said is overreaching and costly to taxpayers. Democrats say the Trump rule puts too much of a burden on defrauded students to prove their case for debt forgiveness." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/18/20]
The September 2019 Education Rule Required Student Loan Borrowers Of Fraudulent Institutions To Demonstrate Financial Harm As A Result Of The Fraud To Receive Student Loan Forgiveness. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Passage, over President Donald Trump's May 29, 2020 veto, of the joint resolution that would provide for congressional disapproval of a September 2019 Education Department rule establishing new policies related to federal student loan forgiveness for borrowers who attended schools that committed fraud or any type of institutional misrepresentation, requiring such borrowers to demonstrate financial harm as a result of the fraud to receive complete or partial cancellation of student loan debt." [Congressional Quarterly, 6/26/20]
The September 2019 Education Rule Allowed Mandatory For Arbitration Agreements And Mandated Borrowers To File Claims Within Three Years After Exiting The Fraudulent Institution. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The rule would also allow for mandatory arbitration agreements related to such claims and require borrowers to file claims within three years of leaving an institution." [Congressional Quarterly, 6/26/20]
2020: Schweikert Voted Against Overturning A Trump Administration Rule That Rolled Back Protections For Student Loan Borrowers. In January 2020, Schweikert voted against a joint resolution that would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide for congressional disapproval of a Sept. 2019 Education Department rule establishing new policies related to federal student loan forgiveness for borrowers who attended schools that committed fraud or any type of institutional misrepresentation, requiring such borrowers to demonstrate financial harm as a result of the fraud to receive complete or partial cancellation of student loan debt The rule would also allow for mandatory arbitration agreements related to such claims and require borrowers to file claims within three years of leaving an institution. The rule is currently scheduled to go into effect on July 1, 2020. Under the bill's provisions, the 2019 rule would have no force or effect." The vote was on passage. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 231-180. [House Vote 22, 1/16/20; Congressional Quarterly, 1/16/20; Congressional Actions, H.J.Res.76]
The Resolution Would Overturn A Trump Administration Rule That Made It More Difficult To Grant Loan Forgiveness To Students Who Were Defrauded By A University. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The Education Department rule in question sets a tougher standard for eliminating student debt when students argue they were defrauded by a university. The rule would require defrauded borrowers to demonstrate financial harm as a result of the fraud in order to have their debt partially or completely canceled, and it would allow for mandatory arbitration agreements related to such claims and require borrowers to file claims within three years of leaving an institution." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/16/20]
Republicans Believed The Obama Rule Is Overreaching, While Democrats Argued The Trump Rule Puts Too Much Of A Burden On Defrauded Students. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The rule, set to take effect July 1, would replace a 2016 Obama administration rule that Republicans said is overreaching and costly to taxpayers. Democrats say the Trump rule puts too much of a burden on defrauded students to prove their case for debt forgiveness." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/18/20]
2014: Schweikert Voted Against Refunding To Student Borrowers The Amount They Would Have Saved Had They Refinanced At 2013-2014 Rates. In July 2014, Schweikert effectively voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "would [have] establish[ed] a program to provide rebates to student loan borrowers equal to the amount they would save if the loan [had been] refinanced at the rates offered during the 2013-2014 academic year." The underlying bill, according to a separate Congressional Quarterly article, "would authorize the Education Department to establish up to 30 competency-based education demonstration projects, which would allow students to earn credits for information mastered as opposed to instructional time. It would allow participating students to receive federal aid and allow the department to waive any Higher Education Act requirements that inhibit the operation of competency-based education programs." The vote was on a motion to recommit the bill to the House Education and the Workforce Committee with instructions that it be reported back immediately with the specified amendment. The House rejected the motion by a vote of 194 to 221. [House Vote 440, 7/23/14; Congressional Quarterly, 7/23/14; Congressional Quarterly, 7/23/14; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3163]
The 2013-2014 Interest Rate On Federal Undergraduate Stafford Student Loans Was 3.86 Percent. According to Forbes, "For the Stafford loan, which is a federal form of aid reserved for undergraduate students, the 0.8% bump in 10-year yield means that the interest rate will go from its current 3.86% fixed rate to a 4.66% fixed rate for loans disbursed July 1, 2014 until June 30, 2015." [Forbes, 5/7/14]
The 2014-2015 Interest Rate On Federal Undergraduate Stafford Student Loans Is 4.66 Percent, Which Will Cost The Borrower An Extra $229.67 Over The 10 Year Life Of A $5,000 Loan. According to Forbes, "While an 0.8% rate hike may seem relatively benign --- and, indeed, it's certainly better than interest rates doubling, as they nearly did last year --- it's not nothing. Consider the following: a $5,000 subsidized Stafford loan repaid over a 10-year period would cost a borrower $1,034.88 in interest at the current 3.86% rate. At the new 4.66% rate, that very same loan would cost a borrower $1,264.55 in interest, or an extra $229.67 over the life of the loan." [Forbes, 5/7/14]
2017: Schweikert Voted For The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution Which In Part Called For Eliminating In-School Undergraduate Student Loan Subsidies. In October 2017, Schweikert voted for a budget resolution that would in part, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide for $2.9 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018. It would balance the budget by fiscal 2023 by reducing spending by $10.1 trillion over 10 years. It would cap total discretionary spending at $1.06 trillion for fiscal 2018 and would assume no separate Overseas Contingency Operations funding for fiscal 2018 or subsequent years and would incorporate funding related to war or terror into the base defense account. It would assume repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul and would convert Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program into a single block grant program. It would require that off budget programs, such as Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, be included in the budget." The underlying legislation was an FY 2018 House GOP budget resolution. The House rejected the RSC budget by a vote of 139 to 281. [House Vote 555, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 455; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
2017: Schweikert Voted For The House GOP FY 2018 Budget Resolution, Which Started The Process Towards Tax Reform, Called For Ending Medicare As We Know It And Called Eliminating The Expanded Income-Based Repayment Program. In October 2017, Schweikert voted for the House GOP FY 2018 budget resolution. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Adoption of the concurrent resolution that would provide for $3.2 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018, not including off-budget accounts. It would assume $1.22 trillion in discretionary spending in fiscal 2018. It would assume the repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul law. It also would propose reducing spending on mandatory programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and changing programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (also known as food stamps). It would call for restructuring Medicare into a 'premium support' system beginning in 2024. I would also require the House Ways and Means Committee to report out legislation under the budget reconciliation process that would provide for a revenue-neutral, comprehensive overhaul of the U.S. tax code and would include instructions to 11 House committees to trigger the budget reconciliation process to cut mandatory spending. The concurrent resolution would assume that, over 10 years, base (non-Overseas Contingency Operations) discretionary defense spending would be increased by a total of $929 billion over the Budget Control Act caps and non-defense spending be reduced by $1.3 trillion." The vote was on passage. The House passed the budget resolution by a vote of 219 to 206. A modified version was later agreed to by both the House and the Senate. [House Vote 557, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
2017: Schweikert Voted For The House GOP FY 2018 Budget Resolution, Which Started The Process Towards Tax Reform, Called For Ending Medicare As We Know It And Called For Eliminating The Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. In October 2017, Schweikert voted for the House GOP FY 2018 budget resolution. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Adoption of the concurrent resolution that would provide for $3.2 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018, not including off-budget accounts. It would assume $1.22 trillion in discretionary spending in fiscal 2018. It would assume the repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul law. It also would propose reducing spending on mandatory programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and changing programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (also known as food stamps). It would call for restructuring Medicare into a 'premium support' system beginning in 2024. I would also require the House Ways and Means Committee to report out legislation under the budget reconciliation process that would provide for a revenue-neutral, comprehensive overhaul of the U.S. tax code and would include instructions to 11 House committees to trigger the budget reconciliation process to cut mandatory spending. The concurrent resolution would assume that, over 10 years, base (non-Overseas Contingency Operations) discretionary defense spending would be increased by a total of $929 billion over the Budget Control Act caps and non-defense spending be reduced by $1.3 trillion." The vote was on passage. The House passed the budget resolution by a vote of 219 to 206. A modified version was later agreed to by both the House and the Senate. [House Vote 557, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Have The Interest Rate On A Federal Student Loan Change Each Year, Depending On Market Conditions. In May 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "would tie the interest rates for all federal student loans (except Perkins loans) issued on or after July 1, 2013, to 10-year Treasury notes --- with rates for subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans to be set each year at the 10-year Treasury note plus 2.5% and rates for graduate and parent PLUS loans to be set at the 10-year note plus 4.5%. Overall interest rates would be capped at 8.5% and 10.5%, respectively. Under the House-passed bill, the interest rates on loans taken out by students each year would 'float' and be reset each subsequent year for the life of the loan to reflect any increases or decreases in rates." The bill passed by a vote of 221 to 198. Another version of the bill was passed by the Senate and the House ultimately agreed to the Senate version. The bill was then sent to the president, who signed it into law. [House Vote 183, 5/23/13; Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13; Public Law 113-28, 8/9/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1911]
Before Bill, Federal Student Loan Rates Had Been Set At 3.4 Percent Since July, 2011, But Were Set To Rise To 6.8 Percent On July 1. According to Congressional Quarterly, "In September 2007, Congress enacted the College Cost Reduction Act (PL 110-84), which overhauled federal student aid programs, primarily by reducing the federal subsidies paid to private lenders that offer federally backed student loans and redirecting the savings to enhance other student aid programs. Among other things, the law set fixed interest rates for federally subsidized, undergraduate student loans, which previously had been tied to economic factors and were increasing at the time. Specifically, interest rates on the popular Stafford loan programs were reduced for new loans, dropping to 6% on July 1, 2009, and gradually declining to 3.4% on July 1, 2011. The lower interest rates were initially set to expire July 1, 2012, and were supposed to increase to 6.8% for student loans originated on or after that date. To prevent that increase during the 2012 presidential campaign, Congress last year enacted the Interest Rate Reduction Act as part of the surface transportation authorization law. [...] The student loan provisions of that law extended the 3.4% interest rate for new, federally subsidized, undergraduate student loans for another year, through June 30, 2013." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13]
Under House Bill And May 2013 Treasury Note Rate, The Interest Rate For Undergraduate Student Loans Issued In The Year After July 1, 2013 Would Be 4.31 Percent During Their First Year, And Then Would Change Each Later Year Depending On The Market Interest Rates At That Time. According to Congressional Quarterly, the 10-year Treasury rate from the May 2013 auction was 1.81 percent. Therefore, the July 1 rate for subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans would be 4.31 percent, while the July 1 rate for graduate and parent PLUS loans would be 6.31 percent. Congressional Quarterly reported that under the House bill, "Rates each year would be determined on June 1, with the Treasury note rate being set by the most recent Treasury auction. Those rates would remain in effect for the 12-month period beginning on July 1." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13; Congressional Quarterly, 5/20/13]
April 2013: Obama Administration Proposed Changing System To Fixed Interest Rate Loans Set Based On Market Conditions When The Loan Is Issued. According to the President's FY 2014 Budget, "Under current law, interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans are slated to rise this summer from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. At a time when the economy is still recovering and market interest rates remain low, the Budget proposes a cost-neutral reform to set interest rates so they more closely follow market rates, and to provide students with more affordable re-payment options. The rate on new loans would be set each year based on a market interest rate, which would remain fixed for the life of the loan so that student borrowers would have certainty about the rates they would pay. The Budget also expands repayment options to ensure that student borrowers do not have to pay more than 10 percent of their discretionary income on loan payments." [Office of Management and Budget, 4/10/13]
Republicans Supportive Of Administration Proposal, But Democrats Opposed Due To Lack Of Interest Rate Cap. According to Congressional Quarterly, "President Obama, as part of his FY 2014 budget, proposed returning student loan interest rates to a system of market-based variable rates tagged to 10-year Treasury notes. [...] Congressional Republicans expressed support for the concept, while Democrats generally were critical of the proposal because it failed to cap interest rates." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/29/13]
Obama Administration Threatened To Veto House Legislation Because Students Borrowing At Current Low Rates Could Not Be Certain That The Rate They Would Be Paying Would Stay Low Throughout The Life Of The Loan. According to Congressional Quarterly, "While the Administration welcomes action by the House on this issue, H.R. 1911 is the wrong approach. First, the bill would not guarantee low rates for today's students. A rate that continues to vary after the loan has already been taken out would create uncertainty and lessen transparency for students and their families who are making decisions about borrowing for college. Second, the bill's changes would impose the largest interest rate increases on low- and middle-income students and families who struggle most to afford a college education. Third, the bill does not include the President's proposal to extend repayment options to borrowers who have already left school and often face the same debt burdens as current and future students. Finally, the Administration believes that student loan interest rates should not be raised to reduce the deficit. If the President were presented with this legislation in its current form, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill" (underline omitted). [Office of Management and Budget, 5/22/13]
2023: Schweikert Voted For The Fiscal Responsibility Act Of 2023, Which Statutorily Ended The Pause On Student Loan Payments On August 29, 2023. In May 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which would, in part, "statutorily end the pause on student loan repayments on Aug. 29, 2023." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 314 to 117, thus the bill was sent to the Senate. The Senate passed the bill, sent it to President Biden, and it was signed into law. [House Vote 243, 5/31/23; Congressional Quarterly, 5/31/23; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3746]
The Packaged Codified Ending The Pause On Loan Payments First Paused By President Trump At The Beginning Of The COVID-19 Pandemic. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Republicans had sought to block the student loan forgiveness in negotiations over raising the debt ceiling, but the agreement (HR 3746) the House passed on Wednesday did not deal with it. It did, however, codify ending a pause on loan payments first instituted by President Donald Trump at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. The bipartisan agreement bars Biden from issuing another extension of the current pause, which is set to end by Sept. 1." [Congressional Quarterly, 6/1/23]
The Package Required Borrowers To Begin Paying Back Their Loans By The End Of Summer 2023, Which The Biden Administration Had Announced Previously. According to CNN, "Under the package, borrowers will have to begin paying back their student loans at the end of the summer, as the Biden administration has already announced, according to a source familiar. The pause has been in effect since the Covid-19 pandemic began." [CNN, 6/2/23]
2014: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Allowing Borrowers To Refinance Their Outstanding Student Loans At Current Borrowing Rates Through December 11, 2014. In September 2014, Schweikert effectively voted against an amendment that, according to the Congressional Record, would have added the first two sections of H.R. 4582, the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act, to the underlying bill funding the government through December 11, 2014. According to a press release from one of that bill's sponsors, Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), "The Bank on Students Emergency Refinancing Act would allow student loan borrowers with public or private loans who borrowed before 2013 to refinance their loans to the lower market-based rates established for students last summer in the Bipartisan Student Loan Certainty Act of 2013. Loans borrowed for undergraduate education would be refinanced to 3.86%; loans borrowed for graduate education would be refinanced to 5.41%; and loans borrowed by parents for their child's education would be refinanced to 6.41%." The proposed amendment would have sunset the student loan provisions on December 11, 2014. The vote was on a motion to recommit the bill and report it back with the specified amendment; the House rejected the motion by a vote of 199 to 228. [House Vote 508, 9/17/14; Congressional Record, 9/17/14; H.J.Res. 124, 9/17/14; Tierney press release, 5/6/14; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 124]
Amendment Would Also Have Temporarily Raised The Minimum Wage To $8.20 An Hour Until December 11, 2014, And Temporarily Enacted The Paycheck Fairness Act As Law Until That Same Date. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have added to the underlying bill "the text of a measure (HR 377) to tighten prohibitions on pay discrimination based on sex, [and] [...] the text of a measure (HR 1010) that would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to increase the federal minimum wage for employees to $8.20 an hour, $9.15 an hour after one year, and $10.10 an hour after two years." According to the Congressional Record, the amendment would have sunset those two bills on December 11, 2014. [Congressional Quarterly, 9/17/14; Congressional Record, 9/17/14]
Amendment Would Also Have Reauthorized The Export-Import Bank For Five Years Instead Of Nine Months. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment "would [also have] extend[ed] the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank for 5 years." The underlying bill included a provision reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank through June 30, 2015. [Congressional Quarterly, 9/17/14; H.J.Res. 124, 9/17/14]
Amendment Did Not Include Earlier Student Loan Proposal's Provisions That Fully Offset The Student Refinancing Loan Program's Costs With A "Buffet Tax" Requiring Those With Incomes Over $1 Million To Pay A Tax Rate Of At Least 30 Percent Of Their Adjusted Gross Income Minus Charitable Contributions. According to the Congressional Record, the proposed amendment did not incorporate sections 3 and 4 of H.R. 4582. Section 3 would have added an offsetting "Buffet Tax," which, according to the Congressional Research Service's summary of the relevant provisions of a companion Senate bill, would "[a]mend[] the Internal Revenue Code to require an individual taxpayer whose adjusted gross income exceeds $1 million to pay a minimum tax rate of 30% of the excess of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income over the taxpayer's modified charitable contribution deduction for the taxable year (tentative fair share tax). [It would] [e]stablish[] the amount of such tax as the excess (if any) of the tentative fair share tax over the excess of: (1) the sum of the taxpayer's regular tax liability, the alternative minimum tax (AMT) amount, and the payroll tax for the taxable year; over (2) certain tax credits. [It would] [p]rovide[] for a phase-in of such tax [and would] [r]equire[] an inflation adjustment to the $1 million income threshold for taxable years beginning after 2015." Section 4 would have, according to the Congressional Research Service's summary, "[r]equire[d] the Secretary to terminate this Act's refinancing programs when the net cost of carrying out the programs is equal to the Secretary's estimate of the amount of additional revenue generated during the 10-year period beginning on the date of this Act's enactment due to the fair share tax." [Congressional Record, 9/17/14; CRS Summary of S. 2432, 6/4/14; CRS Summary of H.R. 4582, 5/6/14]
2022: Schweikert Voted Against Allowing Federal Student Loan Borrowers Who Received A Joint Consolidation Loan As Married Couples To Jointly Apply For Each Borrower To Receive A Separate Federal Loan. In September 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, which would "permit married or formerly married federal student loan borrowers who received a joint consolidation loan as a married couple to jointly apply to the Education Department for each individual to receive a separate federal loan, including if the original loan is in default. The separate loans would be split proportionally based on the percentage of the joint loan attributable to each borrower, or according to the provisions of a divorce agreement." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 232-193, thus the bill was sent to President Biden and it ultimately became law. [House Vote 448, 9/21/22; Congressional Quarterly, 9/21/22; Congressional Actions, S. 1098]
The Bill Allowed Borrowers To Apply On Their Own If They Were Victims Of Domestic Violence Of Economic Abuse, Were Unable To Reasonably Access The Loan Information Of The Other Borrower, Or If The Education Department Determined The Application Was In The Best Fiscal Interest Of The Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "It would permit borrowers to apply individually if they experienced domestic violence or economic abuse from the other borrower; are unable to reasonably reach or access the loan information of the other borrower; or if the department determines that authorizing the individual application would be in the best fiscal interests of the federal government." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/21/22]
The Bill Closed A Loophole Created In The 1990s, When Congress Authorized Married Couples To Consolidate Their Student Loans For A Lower Interest Rate, But When The Program Ended In 2006, Congress Never Authorized A Process For Loan Separation. According to NPR, "The bill in question, the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act, which President Biden is expected to sign this week, closes a loophole created in the 1990s, when Congress began allowing married couples to consolidate their student loans for a lower interest rate. It seemed like a good idea back then -- a way for couples to save money on their loans and have a single monthly payment. Congress shuttered the program in 2006, but never passed a way to separate the loans" [NPR, 10/3/22].]
Between 2006 And 2022, About 14,000 Borrowers Were Linked To Each Other, Even Divorced Borrowers And In Certain Circumstances, Borrowers Were Linked To Abusive Former Spouses. According to NPR, "Sixteen years later, about 14,000 borrowers are still shackled to each other -- even after divorce, an NPR investigation found. In some cases, borrowers are being held responsible for debt that was linked with an abusive former spouse, forced to choose between paying a debt that isn't theirs or tanking their credit as they wait for a solution." [NPR, 10/3/22]
The Bill Allowed Borrowers With Joint Consolidation Loans To Separate Their Loans Proportionally Based On Their Initial Loan. According to NPR, "The new legislation will allow borrowers with joint consolidation loans to separate them proportionally based on their initial loan amount." [NPR, 10/3/22]
The Bill Instructed Borrowers To Apply Through The Education Department, In Which Both Parties Would Sign To Separate The Debts, But If Borrowers Were Victims Of Domestic Abuse Or Economic Abuse Or Were Unable To Reach A Former Partner, They Could Apply Individually. According to NPR, "Borrowers must apply through the U.S. Education Department, which will ask both parties attached to the loan to sign a form separating the debts. However, if a borrower can show they experienced domestic violence or economic abuse from their former partner, or they are unable to reach their former partner, they can initiate the separation by themselves." [NPR, 10/3/22]
The Bill Also Opened The Ability For Many Borrowers To Have Their Loans Forgiven As Part Of The Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. According to NPR, "For many, the Joint Consolidation Loan Separation Act will also open a path to having their loans erased as part of the federal government's Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program." [NPR, 10/3/22]
2023: Schweikert Voted To Override President Biden's Veto And Disapprove The Biden Administration's Student Loan Forgiveness Rule, Which Sought To Forgive Up To $10K In Federal Student Debt And $20K For Pell Grant Recipients. In June 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted to override President Biden's veto on a resolution that would "provide for congressional disapproval of an October 2022 Education Department rule that allows for loan forgiveness of up to $10,000 in loan debt for federal student loan borrowers and another $10,000 for such borrowers who also received a Pell Grant. The rule limits eligibility for such loan forgiveness to borrowers with a maximum adjusted gross income of $125,000, or $250,000 for joint filers. The rule also extended, through the end of 2022, the suspension of student loan payments, the cessation of interest accrual and the suspension of involuntary loan collections. It allowed suspended loan payments during that period to count towards loan forgiveness or loan rehabilitation programs. The rule took effect on Oct. 12, 2022, but its loan forgiveness provisions have not been implemented pending legal challenges. Under the provisions of the joint resolution, the Education Department rule would have no force or effect, canceling the loan forgiveness program and reinstating loan payments and interest accrual that was suspended under the rule." The vote was on a veto override. The House failed to acquire a 2/3 majority and rejected the motion by a vote of 221 to 206, thus the veto was sustained. [House Vote 277, 6/21/23; Congressional Quarterly, 6/21/23; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 45]
2023: Schweikert Voted To Disapprove The Biden Administration's Student Loan Forgiveness Rule, Which Sought To Forgive Up To $10K In Federal Student Debt And $20K For Pell Grant Recipients. In May 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for a resolution that would "provide for congressional disapproval of an October 2022 Education Department rule that allows for loan forgiveness of up to $10,000 in loan debt for federal student loan borrowers and another $10,000 for such borrowers who also received a Pell Grant. The rule limits eligibility for such loan forgiveness to borrowers with a maximum adjusted gross income of $125,000, or $250,000 for joint filers. The rule also extended, through the end of 2022, the suspension of student loan payments, the cessation of interest accrual and the suspension of involuntary loan collections. It allowed suspended loan payments during that period to count towards loan forgiveness or loan rehabilitation programs. The rule took effect on Oct. 12, 2022, but its loan forgiveness provisions have not been implemented pending legal challenges. Under the provisions of the joint resolution, the Education Department rule would have no force or effect, canceling the loan forgiveness program and reinstating loan payments and interest accrual that was suspended under the rule." The vote was on passage. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 218 to 203, thus the resolution was sent to the Senate. The Senate passed the resolution and sent it to the President. President Biden vetoed the resolution. [House Vote 234, 5/24/23; Congressional Quarterly, 5/24/23; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 45]
Republicans Claimed The Rule Would Add Billions To The Federal Debt Without Addressing Rising College Costs And Argued The Plan Was Unfair For Those Who Already Paid Off Their Loans Or Those Who Did Not Go To College. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Republicans said the president's proposal would add billions to the federal debt while doing nothing to address the rising cost of college. They also argued Biden's plan is inherently unfair to those who already paid off their loans or did not attend college." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/24/23]
The Student Loan Relief Program Would Cancel Up To $10K In Debt For Most Students And Up To $20K For Pell Grant Recipient, But The Program Was Placed On Hold Due To Court Challenges. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Biden announced the student loan relief program in August, fulfilling a campaign promise and winning applause from progressives, some of whom had sought a far higher debt relief threshold. The plan, which has been put on hold by court challenges, would cancel up to $10,000 in debt for most students, and up to $20,000 for those who received a Pell Grant." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/24/23]
The Congressional Budget Office Estimated That Rescinding The Student Loan Relief Program Would Cut Spending By $320 Million. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The Congressional Budget Office estimated that eliminating the program would cut spending by $320 billion this fiscal year." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/24/23]
Of The 26 Million Applicants, The Student Loan Relief Program Had Approved Over 16 Million Applications. According to Congressional Quarterly, "About 26 million people have applied for the program and more than 16 million applications were approved, according to a fact sheet prepared by the White House." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/24/23]
House Democrats Argued That Ending The Student Relief Program Would Disproportionately Impact Female, Black, Latinx, First-Generation, And Working-Class College Students. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House Democrats said the GOP effort to derail Biden's debt relief plan would disproportionately hurt female, Black, Latino and first-generation college students, as well as the working-class voters the GOP is seeking to reach." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/24/23]
2023: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Disapprove The Biden Administration's Student Loan Forgiveness Rule. In May 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the "adoption of the rule (H Res 429) that would provide for floor consideration of [...] the joint resolution (H J Res 45) disapproving the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness rule. The rule would provide for up to one hour of general debate on each measure. It would make in order floor consideration of three amendments to HR 467." The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of 217 to 204. [House Vote 231, 5/23/23; Congressional Quarterly, 5/23/23; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 429; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 45]
2023: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Disapprove The Biden Administration's Student Loan Forgiveness Rule. In May 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the "motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 429) that would provide for floor consideration of [...] the joint resolution (H J Res 45) disapproving the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness rule. The rule would provide for up to one hour of general debate on each measure. It would make in order floor consideration of three amendments to HR 467." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 219 to 208. [House Vote 230, 5/23/23; Congressional Quarterly, 5/23/23; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 429; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 45]
2023: Schweikert Voted For A GOP Debt Limit Package, Which Would Nullify President Biden's Executive Orders That Suspended Student Loan Payments And Bar The Education Department From Implementing Similar Policies Without Congressional Approval. In April 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023, which, "To limit regulatory spending, the bill would nullify pending executive actions suspending student loan payments and prohibit the Education Department from implementing any substantially similar actions without congressional approval." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 217 to 215, thus the bill was sent to the Senate. [House Vote 199, 4/26/23; Congressional Quarterly, 4/26/23; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2811]
2020: Schweikert Voted Against Providing $10,000 In Private Student Debt Forgiveness To Every Borrower. In July 2020, Schweikert voted against an amendment to the FY 2021 NDAA that would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require the Treasury Department to carry out a program to make payments of up to $10,000 to help pay down private education student loans. It also would require loan holders that receive payments under the program to modify the loan to lower monthly payments by the borrower." The vote was on adoption. The House adopted the amendment by a vote of 217-198. [House Vote 149, 7/21/20; Congressional Quarterly, 7/21/20; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt.840; Congressional Actions, H.R.6395]
The Amendment Provided $10,000 In Private Student Loan Forgiveness To Every Borrower. According to Forbes, "Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) has introduced legislation to cancel private student loan debt in response to the Coronavirus pandemic and economic recession. [...] Dean's proposal would provide for $10,000 in private student loan forgiveness for every borrower." [Forbes, 7/20/20]
Republicans Opposed The Amendment, Calling It "Socialized Student Debt." According to Forbes, "Republicans blasted Dean's proposal. Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) accused Democrats of trying to 'socialize all student debt.'" [Forbes, 7/20/20]
2017: Schweikert Voted For The House GOP's 2017 Tax Reform Plan Which Significantly Cut Taxes For The Rich And Corporations And Repealed The Tax Deduction For Student Loan Interest. In November 2017, Schweikert voted for reconciliation legislation which significantly altered the federal tax code. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill substantially restructures the U.S. tax code to simplify the code and reduce taxes on individuals, corporations and small businesses. For individuals, it consolidates the current seven tax brackets down to four and eliminates or restricts many tax credits and deductions, including by eliminating the deduction for state and local income taxes and limiting the deduction for property taxes to $10,000 and the interest deduction for a home mortgage to the first $500,000 worth of a loan. [...] On the business side, it reduces the corporate tax from 35% to 20% and establishes a 'territorial' tax system that would exempt most income derived overseas from U.S. corporate taxation. It allows businesses to immediately expense 100% of the cost of assets acquired and placed into service, and for small businesses it raises the Section 179 expensing limit to $5 million for five years. It also establishes a 25% rate for a portion of pass-through business income that would otherwise have to be paid at the ordinary individual tax level, and for small businesses where an individual would receive less than $150,000 in pass-through income it taxes the first $75,000 of that income at a 9% rate." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 227 to 205. President Trump later signed an amended version of the bill into law. [House Vote 637, 11/16/17; Congressional Quarterly, 11/15/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
Legislation Repealed The Tax Deduction For Student Loan Interest. According to the Washington Post, "At the moment, low and middle income Americans can deduct up to $2,500 a year in student loan interest. That benefit would go away in 2018." [Washington Post, 11/16/17]
In 2015, 12 Million People Used This 'Above The Line' Tax Deduction. According to CNBC, "In 2015, more than 12 million borrowers included a student loan interest deduction on their Form 1040, according to IRS records. Those taxpayers represent nearly 3 in 10 of the estimated 44 million Americans with student loan debt. Under current rules, borrowers can deduct up to $2,500 in interest paid toward qualifying federal and private student loans. (See infographic below for some of the ins and outs.) It's an 'above-the-line' deduction on your Form 1040, meaning it directly reduces your taxable income --- and you don't need to itemize to claim it." [CNBC, 11/2/17]
2016: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Debating A Bill Allowing Borrowers To Refinance Student Loans At Reduced Rates. In September 2016, Schweikert voted for a motion to order the previous question that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "(end[ed] debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 897) that would provide for additional House floor consideration of the bill (HR 5303) that would authorize 31 Army Corps of Engineers water resources projects, including navigation, flood control, environmental restoration and natural disaster damage projects, and would provide for House floor consideration of the bill (HR 6094) that would delay, by six months, implementation of a Labor Department overtime rules revision." According to the House Democratic Leader, "The Democratic Previous Question would force a vote on H.R. 1434, the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act, which would allow millions of borrowers to refinance their existing student loans at lower interest rates, similar to those currently available to new borrowers." The vote was on the motion to order the previous question. The House adopted the motion, thereby defeating the Democratic alternative, by a vote of 242 to 183. [House Vote 565, 9/28/16; Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/16; Democratic Leader, Accessed 11/7/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1434; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5303; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5325; Congressional Actions, H.R. 6094; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 897]
2016: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Debating A Bill Allowing Borrowers To Refinance Student Loans At Reduced Rates. In September 2016, Schweikert voted for a motion to order the previous question that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "(end[ed] debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 858) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill (HR 3590) that would lower the threshold at which individuals may deduct unreimbursed medical expenses from their income as set by the 2010 health care law." According to the House Democratic Leader, "The Democratic Previous Question would force a vote on the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act that would allow millions of borrowers to refinance their existing student loans at lower interest rates, similar to those currently available to new borrowers." The vote was on the motion to order the previous question. The House adopted the motion, thereby defeating the Democratic alternative, by a vote of 237 to 171. [House Vote 500, 9/13/16; Congressional Quarterly, 9/13/16; Democratic Leader, Accessed 11/7/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1434; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3590; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 858]
2015: Schweikert Voted Against Allowing Automatic Telephone Dialing Calls To Cellphones In Order To Collect Government Loans As Part Of The Bipartisan Budget Act Of 2015. In October 2015, Schweikert voted against allowing automatic telephone calls to cell phones in order to collect government backed or owed debts part of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The agreement allows debt collectors to use automatic telephone dialing systems to call the cellphones of individuals in order to collect debts owed to, or guaranteed by, the U.S. government. Currently, calling a cellphone using an automatic dialing system is prohibited in all instances except for emergencies or if the person being called has given prior express consent. Calling a cellphone for the collection of private debts and any other automated calls to cellphones would remain prohibited." The measure was part of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, which also "would suspend the debt limit until March 15, 2017 and increase[d] the discretionary spending cap for fiscal 2016 by $50 billion and for fiscal 2017 by $30 billion, with the increases split equally between defense and non-defense spending" among other provisions." The vote was on a motion to concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 266 to 167. The Senate later passed the bill and the president later signed it into law. [House Vote 579, 10/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 10/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 10/27/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1314]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Eliminate Federal Subsidies That Cover The Interest On Student Loans For Undergraduate Students While They Are In School. In April 2014, Schweikert voted for the Republican Study Committee's proposed budget resolution for fiscal years 2015 to 2024. According to the Republican Study Committee, "Under current law, interest does not accrue for undergraduate students who take advantage of federal backed student loans. Meanwhile, recent reforms eliminated the in-school subsidy for graduate students. This budget proposes to also eliminate the in-school subsidy for undergraduate students, saving $41 billion over the next decade." The House considered the RSC budget as a substitute amendment to House Republicans' FY 2015 budget resolution; the amendment was rejected by a vote of 133 to 291. [House Vote 175, 4/10/14; Republican Study Committee, 4/7/14; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 615; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 96]