legislative and regulatory impact on technology standards panel discussion – april 24, 2007

16
Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Upload: blaise-carson

Post on 13-Jan-2016

217 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology

StandardsPanel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Page 2: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Introductions Kathleen Smith Wanda Hall

Page 3: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Overview

What are the Politics? Background on Pending Legislation Negotiated Rulemaking Panel Discussion Questions and Answers

Page 4: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

What are the Politics? New Congress New Leadership

Senate: Harry Reid (D-NV), Richard Durbin (D-IL) House: Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Steny Hoyer (D-MD)

New Committee Chairmen Senate: Edward Kennedy (D-MA) House: George Miller (D-CA)

Pending Presidential Election

Page 5: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

2007 Higher Education Proposals

College Student Relief Act – H.R. 5 Student Debt Relief Act – S. 359

Student Loan Sunshine Act – H.R. 890; S. 486

Borrower Bill of Rights – S. 511 STAR Act – H.R. 1010; S. 572

The Pell Grant Equity Act – H.R. 990

Page 6: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

2007 Higher Education Proposals

College Student Relief Act - H.R. 5 introduced by Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller (D-CA) Approved by a vote of 356-71 Jan. 17th Permanent cuts for a temporary “benefit”

Offset Details Reduce lender insurance from 97 percent to 95 percent; Eliminate the Exceptional Performer program; Incrementally reduce the “guarantee agency collection retention”

rate to 16 percent (actual rate to be determined through regulation);

Double the lender-paid origination fee on all loans from 0.5 percent to 1 percent;

Reduce lender yield by 10 basis points for those large lenders holding the top 90 percent of student loan volume; and

Increase from 1.05 to 1.30 percent the interest payment rebate fee paid on consolidation loans for holders with 90 percent or more of total principal and accrued unpaid interest in consolidation loans.

Page 7: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

2007 Higher Education Proposals

The Student Debt Relief Act (S. 359) Kennedy

Would “give colleges new incentives to offer loans to students through the Direct Loan program.” (STAR Act)

Cuts interest rates on new Subsidized Stafford in half. Expands ICR, forgives loans after 10 years for public-

sector employees. Expands and modifies higher education tax provisions. Allows for in-school consolidation and re-consolidation. Makes 458 account mandatory.

Page 8: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

2007 Higher Education Proposals

STAR Act Bills: Petri (HR 1010) and Kennedy (S 572)

Require the Secretary of Education to carry out a “Student Aid Reward Program” to “encourage” institutions of higher education (IHEs) to participate in the Title IV student loan program that is “most cost-effective” for taxpayers.

Requires the Secretary provide IHEs participating in the most cost-effective loan program a Student Aid Reward Payment.

Requires IHEs receiving reward payments to provide loans under such loan program for a period of five years, beginning on the date the first payment is made.

Requires funds awarded to IHES to be used, where appropriate, to supplement students’ Pell Grant awards. Also permits funds to be used to award need-based grants to lower- and middle-income graduate students.

Requires the Secretary to encourage all IHEs to participate in the Student Aid Reward Program.

Page 9: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

2007 Higher Education Proposals

Borrower Bill of Rights (S. 511) – Clinton Requires certain information to be provided:

Five Months After Ceasing to Be Enrolled at Least Half Time

During Delinquency During Default During the Transfer of a Loan to a New Servicer During Consolidation (& During Consolidation with

a Private Loan) Allows for loan reconsolidation

Page 10: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

2007 Higher Education Proposals Student Loan Sunshine Act (H.R. 890/S. 486) –

Miller/Kennedy Require lenders in one or more educational loan

arrangements to submit to the Secretary an annual report in addition to other disclosure requirements under federal law.

Forbid lenders from providing a private educational loan to a student or parent until the institution has informed the student or parent of their remaining options for borrowing under Title IV.

Forbid institutions to brand private education loans with the school’s name, emblem, mascot or logo.

Ban lenders from offering gifts worth more than $10 to college employees, including travel, lodging, entertainment, and in-kind services that lenders provide to college financial aid offices.

Page 11: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

2007 Higher Education Proposals HR 990; The Pell Grant Equity Act

(Miller/McKeon; passed House) Eliminate the tuition sensitivity requirement

of the Pell Grant program for the 2007-2008 academic year.

Reduce, as a cost offset, guaranty agency default collection payments from 23 percent to 22 percent beginning October 1, 2007 and ending September 30, 2008.

Page 12: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Department of Ed President’s Budget proposes major changes

and cuts to FFELP ($18.8 billion over 5 years) Reduce SAP on all loans by 50 bp Reduce default insurance from 97% to 95%; EP falls

from 99% to 97% Reduce account maintenance fees paid to guaranty

agencies by conversion to a unit-cost system Reduce guaranty agency default collection payments

from 23% to 16% Increase consolidation loan lender-paid fee from 0.5%

to 1% Other loan proposals

Increase 3rd and 4th year loan limits from $5,500 to $7,500 and increases aggregate limit from $23,000 to $30,500

Equalize FFEL and DL PLUS rate at 8.3%

Page 13: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Department of Ed (cont.) Negotiated Rulemaking

http://www.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2007/nr.html Four Teams

Loans General Provisions ACG/SMART Grants Accreditation

Sessions for Loans team began in December and continued in February and March

Fourth and final session to be held April 18-20 Department to draft a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM) 60-day public comment period Final publication on or before Nov. 1, 2007 Effective July 1, 2008

Page 14: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Neg Reg Contentious Issues Abound

Preferred Lender lists Borrower choice to be protected Is a number of lenders on the list the answer? Is Department enforcing current law?

Definition of illegal inducements for loan applications Should there be a list of allowable activities Rebuttable Presumptions Other institution/lender relationships at risk? Borrower benefits must be protected Is the Department enforcing current law?

Electronic record retention Department wants all disbursement records

Forgiveness for crime of identity theft Department insisting “crime” must be proven

Page 15: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Other Issues Media implications of improper

relationships among schools and lenders

AG in New York and Minnesota seeking information

Senator Kennedy and Representative Miller seeking information

Impact on issues under negotiation and under review for Congressional Action

Page 16: Legislative and Regulatory Impact on Technology Standards Panel Discussion – April 24, 2007

Panel Discussion and Q and A Many legislative proposal

contained within the Negotiated Rulemaking Process

A discussion of those issues, problems, potential outcomes and concerns