PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 6, 2015
Earnings Contingent Education Loans Act of 2015 or the ExCEL Act of 2015
This bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to replace several existing federal student loan programs with a single repayment plan that caps annual debt repayments based on the borrower's income.
The bill terminates the authority of the Department of Education (ED) to make federal Direct Stafford Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loans, and Direct PLUS loans, subject to exceptions for existing student borrowers, PLUS loans made to parents of undergraduates, and Direct Consolidation Loans.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
To replace the programs, the bill establishes the Income Dependent Education Assistance (IDEA) Loan Program and the IDEA Loan Repayment Program, which limit annual repayments based on the borrower's income and prohibit the accrual of interest on loans for active duty service members. Loans under the program are not eligible for the federal public service loan forgiveness program.
ED must provide through the Internet a tool to enable borrowers to make payments and access specified details regarding loans.
The bill amends the Social Security Act (SSAct) to provide ED with access to information in the National Directory of New Hires to determine when borrowers are hired and remind them of their repayment status and obligation to provide accurate employment information.
The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to require: (1) reporting on W-2 forms the total amount deducted and withheld under the IDEA Loan Repayment Program, and (2) the Department of the Treasury to disclose to ED tax return information necessary to carry out the IDEA Loan Repayment Program.
People & committees
Rep. Zeldin, Lee M. [R-NY-1] · R–NY
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 and Workforce Training.
Referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.3695 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.3695 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.3695 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.3695 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.