PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 4, 2001
Higher Education Affordability and Fairness Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow a limited tax deduction for qualified higher education tuition and related expenses.Provides that the increase in the Lifetime Learning Credit to 20 percent of $10,000 of tuition from $5,000 of tuition shall be effective starting in 2002 rather than 2003.Directs the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct an annual study to examine whether the Federal income tax incentives to provide education assistance affect higher education tuition rates in order to identify if institutions of higher education are absorbing the intended savings by raising tuition rates.Expresses the sense of the Senate that the maximum Pell Grant should be increased to $4,700 to pay approximately: (1) 20 percent of the tuition, fees, room and board, and other expenses of the average college; or (2) the tuition and fees of the average public college.
People & committees
Sen. Torricelli, Robert G. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3437-3438)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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 S.687 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 S.687 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 S.687 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 S.687 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.