PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Sep 30, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Declares the sense of Congress that: (1) the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 addresses the unique situations that active duty military personnel and other affected individuals may face in connection with their enrollment in postsecondary institutions and their federal student loans; and (2) the provisions authorized by such Act should be made permanent, thereby allowing the Secretary of Education to continue providing assistance to active duty service members and other affected individuals and their families.
Amends the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 to repeal the termination date of such act, thereby making permanent the Secretary's authority to waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to the student financial assistance programs under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as deemed necessary in connection with a war or other military operation or national emergency.
People & committees
Rep. Sestak, Joe [D-PA-7] · D–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness.
Became Public Law No: 110-93.
Became Public Law No: 110-93.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Cleared for White House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S12316)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S12316)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H10789)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H10789)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3625.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10789-10791)
Mr. Sestak moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3625 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3625 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3625 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3625 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.