PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 13, 2007
College Cost Reduction and Access Act Technical Amendments of 2007 - Makes technical changes to amendments the College Cost Reduction and Access Act (the Act) made to the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA).
Ensures that mandatory Pell grant funding made available for any fiscal year by such Act remains available for the succeeding fiscal year (thus, for the full Pell grant award year).
Specifies the untaxed income and benefits which the Act excluded from the list of untaxed income and benefits considered in federal student need analyses (thereby, specifically excluding them from such analyses).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Clarifies that students who were orphans, wards of the court, or in foster care when they were 13 or older are independent for federal student aid purposes.
Provides that, for married borrowers who file separate tax returns, income-based loan repayments under the HEA shall be determined solely on the basis of their individual student loan debt and adjusted gross income.
Ensures that National Guard members who serve full-time are eligible for the student loan deferment the Act provides to other military personnel for 13 months after the conclusion of active duty service.
Moves the Act's funding program for minority-serving institutions from title IV (Student Assistance) to title III (Institutional Aid) of the HEA.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, George [D-CA-7] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H13819-13820)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H13819-13820)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4153.
Mr. Bishop (NY) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H13819-13820)
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.
Source last updated: Jul 21, 2025. 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.4153 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.4153 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.4153 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.4153 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.