Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Smith], the chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims. I agree with the legislation that the gentleman has introduced, and I share his regret that the Senate made it only a 4-year extension. There was no good reason for that. But, Mr. Speaker, I also share the gentleman's view that the best thing for us to do is to concur, so we can at least keep it going. The colleges deserve to have been supported by the Federal Government, not interfered with when this first came up. As the gentleman from Texas very accurately explained, what we are talking about here is an effort by the colleges to put their scholarship money where the need is the greatest. Absent this kind of antitrust exemption, there would be pressures on them to bid for a few students, regardless of whether or not need existed, and that would take money away in a limited-resource universe that we live in, from students in great need. Mr. Speaker, I thought it was a serious error when the Department of Justice years ago interfered here. Congress did the right thing by stepping in to protect the right of the universities to do this. We should be making it permanent, and the gentleman from Texas has taken the lead here in a very good way. Given that the Senate did not want to go along with the permanent extension, this is the best we could do and so we should do it.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of legislation supporting colleges and scholarship funding.
Share
More from Barney Frank
Barney Frank, the author of the Dodd-Frank bill, in this committee, sitting in that chair, who has testified in this committee that he told us that the $50 billion threshold is arbitrary and that we should look at alternative methods for…
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau may not exercise any rulemaking, supervisory, enforcement, or any other authority including any authority to order assessments over a motor vehicle dealer that is predominantly engaged in the sale…
how do you morally justify further disadvantaging that child by denying him or her benefits? Because that's what this bill allows.
It was a great mistake to push lower income people into housing they couldn't afford and couldn't really handle once they had it.





