[Pages H1135-H1142]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

SECTION 529 COLLEGE SAVINGS PLANS AMENDMENTS

Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 121,
I call up the bill (H.R. 529) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to improve 529 plans, and ask for its immediate consideration in
the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 121, the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on
Ways and Means, printed in the bill, shall be considered as adopted,
and the bill, as amended, shall be considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 529

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) When the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation
Act of 2001 became law, the tax treatment of section 529
college savings plans was changed so that qualified
distributions were no longer taxed as income. The favorable
tax treatment of college savings plans was made permanent
with the passage of the Pension Protection Act of 2006.
(2) Section 529 college savings plans empower middle-class
families to accumulate savings to offset the rising costs of
attending college.
(3) The latest data from the College Savings Plan Network
shows that there are 11.83 million 529 accounts open
throughout all 50 states, which represent $244.5 billion in
total assets. The average 529 account size is $20,671.
(4) States that sponsor 529 college savings plans have
taken steps to ensure these plans are a tool that all
families can use to save for college, including setting
minimum contributions as low as $25 per month to encourage
participation by families of all income levels.
(5) The President's fiscal year 2016 Budget proposes
raising taxes by taxing certain future distributions made
from 529 college savings plans.
(6) The tax proposed by the President would discourage the
use of 529 college savings plans, requiring families and
students to take on more debt.
(7) Purchase of a computer represents a significant higher
education expense and therefore

[[Page H1136]]

should be eligible for qualified distributions under 529
college savings plans.
(b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to--
(1) enact policies that strengthen 529 college savings
plans, and
(2) make 529 plans more modern, consumer-friendly, and
responsive to the realities faced by students today.

SEC. 2. COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT PERMANENTLY ALLOWED
AS A QUALIFIED HIGHER EDUCATION EXPENSE FOR
SECTION 529 ACCOUNTS.

(a) In General.--Section 529(e)(3)(A)(iii) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
``(iii) expenses for the purchase of computer or peripheral
equipment (as defined in section 168(i)(2)(B)), computer
software (as defined in section 197(e)(3)(B)), or Internet
access and related services, if such equipment, software, or
services are to be used primarily by the beneficiary during
any of the years the beneficiary is enrolled at an eligible
educational institution.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2014.

SEC. 3. ELIMINATION OF DISTRIBUTION AGGREGATION REQUIREMENTS.

(a) In General.--Section 529(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by striking subparagraph (D).
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to distributions after December 31, 2014.

SEC. 4. RECONTRIBUTION OF REFUNDED AMOUNTS.

(a) In General.--Section 529(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended by section 3, is amended by adding
at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) Special rule for contributions of refunded amounts.--
In the case of a beneficiary who receives a refund of any
qualified higher education expenses from an eligible
educational institution, subparagraph (A) shall not apply to
that portion of any distribution for the taxable year which
is recontributed to a qualified tuition program of which such
individual is a beneficiary, but only to the extent such
recontribution is made not later than 60 days after the date
of such refund and does not exceed the refunded amount.''.
(b) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendment made by this section shall
apply with respect to refunds of qualified higher education
expenses after December 31, 2014.
(2) Transition rule.--In the case of a refund of qualified
higher education expenses received after December 31, 2014,
and before the date of the enactment of this Act, section
529(c)(3)(D) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added
by this section) shall be applied by substituting ``not later
than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this
subparagraph'' for ``not later than 60 days after the date of
such refund''.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins)
and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis) each will control
30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Kansas.

General Leave

Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks on H.R. 529, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
improve 529 plans.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Kansas?
There was no objection.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Ryan for his leadership
on this critical and timely issue and my colleague Congressman Kind of
Wisconsin for 4 years of bipartisan efforts to encourage families to
invest for their children's future.
I rise today in support of H.R. 529, my legislation that reaffirms
Congress' commitment to not only preserving, but strengthening,
expanding, and modernizing 529 college savings plans.
Currently, there are nearly 12 million 529 accounts open in all 50
States. Considering there were only 1 million accounts open in 2001,
the growth in popularity of these accounts is truly remarkable and is
still on an upward trajectory.
The popularity of 529 accounts among American families is no mystery.
Higher education costs across the country are rising at a pace that
exceeds the rate of inflation, and folks are looking for ways to plan
responsibly for the future.
A 2014 Gallup Poll of America's top financial concerns showed that
among adults between the ages of 30 and 49, ``not having enough money
to pay for your children's college'' is a top concern for families,
trailing only retirement concerns.
It is natural that folks would turn toward 529 savings accounts.
These accounts are easy to set up and use and accountholders can make a
monthly contribution as small as $10 to invest to their children's
future on a tax-deferred basis.
The 12 million 529 accounts today have an average balance of around
$20,000, which will go a long way toward helping families offset
college costs and helping students to begin their careers with a
lighter debt burden.
When the President proposed a plan in his 2016 budget to tax future
distributions from 529 savings accounts, Members on both sides of the
aisle were appalled.
His billion-dollar tax proposal on families saving for college would
have completely eliminated the purpose of saving responsibly for higher
education in the first place and would have inevitably moved more
students toward student loans and other sources of financial aid.
We fundamentally disagree with the direction of the President's
policy proposal, and instead, we want to make 529 college savings plans
more consumer friendly and reflective of the realities faced by
students today.
This legislation will make computer purchases with 529 plans a
qualified expense. Computers are an essential part of higher education,
and the law should be updated to reflect that.
A Pew Research Center report in 2011 found that a vast majority of
undergraduate, graduate, and community college students use some sort
of computer to participate in a college experience that now features
online courses, class work, and e-textbooks. I believe this is a
commonsense modernization measure.
The bill will also remove distribution aggregation requirements,
which are an outdated burden on 529 plan administrators and States.
When 529 college savings plans were originated back in 1996, the funds
were taxed before they were deposited into the account and then taxed a
second time when they were used to pay for higher education expenses.
At that time, it made sense for plan administrators to aggregate
accounts for beneficiaries with multiple 529 accounts in order to
determine the taxable dollars dispersed among the accounts.
However, the law was changed back in 2001 so that 529 savings are
only taxed once now, before they are put into the 529 account. The only
taxable funds at disbursement are for nonqualified expenses. According
to a GAO report from 2012 that has the most recent data on the topic,
nonqualified distributions from 529 plans only made up 5.3 percent of
total distributions in 2010.
Because of the past changes to tax treatment of 529s, it no longer
makes sense for plan administrators to aggregate these accounts for tax
purposes. It represents an undue burden, which could potentially raise
the administrative cost for operating these plans. This is why this
legislation will remove these requirements.
Finally, the bill will allow a student who receives a refund on any
529 qualified expenses to redeposit those funds into their 529 without
penalty.
Refunds of 529 dollars could happen for any number of reasons: a
student may withdraw from a certain course, may receive a scholarship
offer or other financial aid after their 529 plans have already been
used, or may have to withdraw from school because of an illness.
Whatever the reasons, subjecting these funds to a penalty works
against the spirit of 529 college savings plans, and this bill will
correct that.
These are sensible yet important improvements to 529 college savings
plans that should receive resounding support from both sides of the
aisle. As we continue our work in the House to empower hardworking
families with bottoms-up solutions, I urge my colleagues to support the
passage of this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
I am a strong supporter of 529 college savings plans. When I
cochaired the Education and Family Tax Working Group with
Representative Diane Black from Tennessee during the 113th Congress, we
heard from education stakeholders that education tax benefits should
reflect a three-legged stool

[[Page H1137]]

with one leg helping families save for college, one leg helping
families pay for college, and one leg helping families repay college.

College is, indeed, expensive, and it is a wise public investment to
use Federal incentives to encourage families to save for college.
H.R. 529 makes three important improvements to 529 accounts: one, it
makes computer technology an allowable expense; two, it improves the
calculation for taxing distributions to better reflect one's earnings;
and, three, it allows distributions that are refunded by a college upon
a student's withdrawal to be reinvested in 529 accounts within 60 days
without being subject to a tax.
I support these important improvements to 529 education plans. In
addition, I hope that the Republican leadership will advance the bill's
sister bill, the Savings Enhancement for Education in College Act,
which was H.R. 529 in the last Congress and also championed by
Representatives Jenkins and Kind.
This former H.R. 529 bill includes the two substantive improvements
to 529s that advocates explain would best help middle-income families
save more for college.
We know that low- and moderate-income families have a harder time
saving for college because they have less extra cash available to put
away in a savings account.
The Savings Enhancement for Education in College Act would
substantially help low- and middle-income families save by allowing
low-income taxpayers to take advantage of the saver's credit and
allowing employers to match up to $600 a year in 529 contributions.
I think that these provisions are excellent. The saver's credit
currently helps offset part of the first $2,000 that low-income workers
voluntarily contribute to IRA and 401(k) plans. Extending this tax
benefit for 529 plans is a commonsense way to help increase college
savings by low- and moderate-income families.
Further, I think that the employer match is an especially promising
tool to improve college savings by lower-income Americans because it
adds $600 a family didn't have for college before that can grow and
support education over time.
These two improvements are needed because the savings data show that
529 savings have dropped tremendously since 2009. From 2005 to 2009,
around 60 percent of the accounts saw contributions; however, in the
last few years, the account contributions have been closer to 45
percent.
I am a bit surprised that these substantive improvements are not
included in the bill before us today, and I truly hope that Republican
leadership will advance these 529 provisions that would tremendously
improve savings for lower- and middle-income Americans.
In the interest of fairness, I also hope that we make computer
technology an allowable expense for the American opportunity tax
credit.
Currently, computers and software are not qualified expenses for the
AOTC, and I think that the definition of qualified expenses should be
uniform across 529s and AOTC benefits. These are all great improvements
that have, in fact, been made.
I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1445

Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), the chair of the
House Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, it won't be all that much time. I
just simply want to congratulate the gentlelady from Kansas on bringing
this legislation forward. We brought this out of committee. We had no
resistance because this is just a commonsense bill.
This upgrades the law to reflect the realities of a college
education. You ought to be able to buy a computer. You ought to be able
to buy software with your college savings dollars because it is an
essential ingredient to your education.
More importantly, if a person gets a refund if they cancel a class,
if for some reason the college rebates money to you, you ought to be
able to put it back into your savings plan. These are commonsense ideas
that make this important vehicle for savings more workable and reflects
the common problems that people have in this 21st century.
It is essential that we give people and families the ability to save
for education. This bill also sends a signal: we believe in the 529
plans; 529 plans are going to stay; they are a good thing; we are not
going to attack them; we are going to develop and grow them.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 4
minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), who is a cosponsor
of this legislation and a tireless advocate for education.
Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Illinois for yielding
me this time.
I want to thank my partner in crafting this legislation,
Representative Jenkins. This has been the product of a few years of
hard work, of listening to various outside groups and trying to
understand the difficulty of saving for higher education that many
working families are experiencing today.
The legislation before us, H.R. 529, as the chairman of the committee
just pointed out, is a commonsense proposal with some reasonable
technical corrections to the 529 savings plans that already exist in
all 50 States, allowing for the qualification expense for computers and
software, which is a new learning tool that sometimes is required in
the classroom for higher education. It allows for the refund of tuition
and expenses if you had to withdraw from college for some reason, and
it also reduces and minimizes the unnecessary bureaucratic and
administrative paperwork. In that respect, there are some commonsense
steps that we can do to modernize the 529 program and make sure that it
is working for more families.
I do agree with my colleague from Illinois that we have a challenge
of trying to democratize these programs a lot more. We have roughly 3
percent participation rate in 529s throughout the entire Nation. We
have got to figure out a way to do a better job of increasing those
savings opportunities for more families, but especially lower income
families that don't have the disposable income right now in order to
participate in these programs, whether it is the tax credit that
Representative Davis was talking about, employer matches, by thinking
creatively of how we can democratize these so more families can take
advantage of them. That is going to be crucial.
In Wisconsin alone, we have got roughly 257,000 accounts in the State
Edvest program and Tomorrow's Scholar 529 plans. The families have
saved about $3.7 billion for college or their technical schools,
reducing the need for greater student loans, helping them access
college. These programs not only encourage savings for college but help
middle class families get in the habit of saving for other important
life events, such as retirement, that we have to do a better job at.
I also think, given that the Congressional Budget Office has a cost
associated with it, which is roughly $5 million a year--not a lot in
Federal budget terms--that there is no reason at all why we couldn't
have brought this legislation to the floor today with an acceptable
pay-for so we are not adding any deficit to future generations.
In fact, again, Representative Davis offered, during the committee
markup, a responsible amendment that would have done a better job of
means testing the 529 contributions and cutting it off to families that
earn up to $3 million. Now, to put this in perspective, the top 1
percent of income earners in Wisconsin earn less than $1 million. So it
was still a very generous, high threshold, but it was enough money to
pay for the $51 million expense over the next 10 years that the
Congressional Budget Office scored this at. There is no reason why we
can't be making these type of tough decisions as well when it comes to
policy changes that make sense for working families and act in a more
fiscally responsible manner.
I think these 529 accounts have been established. They do work well
for those who can participate. And this is especially important for a
State like Wisconsin today, whose Governor just submitted a budget
proposal calling for a cut of over $300 million out of our university
system, a university system

[[Page H1138]]

that is really the pride and joy of the State of Wisconsin, has given
us a competitive advantage, not only in the upper Midwest, but
throughout the Nation and the world, where we had some of the top
scholars and researchers wanting to come there to do their work,
students wanting to stay in the State so they can participate in these
UW system colleges and universities that we have.
Obviously, the Governor wants to take it in a different direction;
$300 million worth of cuts gets into the bone. So, again, we have got
to think creatively of how we can make it affordable for families to be
able to send their kids on to school. This is one way to do it: savings
in 529s.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman.
Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
We ought not also ignore other important financial aid programs that
especially speak to the needs of low-income children: the Pell grant
program, work-study opportunities on and off campus, the GEAR UP and
TRIO programs. This, too, helps many students--including myself, who is
the first generation that went on to school--to be able to afford
higher education so we are not driving these kids deeper and deeper
into debt. The average undergrad in Wisconsin, by the time they
graduate, has $28,000 worth of debt. It is the second largest debt in
the Nation behind mortgages. At $1.2 trillion, it exceeds all credit
card debt.
So the 529 is another vehicle to try to alleviate that student
indebtedness issue that is affecting more and more kids and families
throughout the Nation. We ought to fix it by making a pay-for. This is
a good first step, necessary policy changes. I encourage my colleagues
to support the legislation.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), an esteemed member
of the House Committee on Ways and Means and subcommittee chair of the
Subcommittee on Oversight.
Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Speaker, do you notice something? Did you notice that, as Speaker
and the person who is presiding over this Chamber today, oftentimes you
hear a great deal of difficulty between the two parties and a lot of
wrangling and a lot of different positions and so forth that manifests
itself in arguing and so forth, but did you notice something? You are
hearing both sides of the aisle coming before you and coming before
this House and saying the same thing, and that is we ought to move H.R.
529.
There is a recognition, and I think my constituency in suburban
Chicago is breathing a collective sigh of relief right now because they
are saying: Hey, people are paying attention to things that matter to
me and matter to my future and matter to my children, that is, they are
taking a bill or a provision in the law that has been successful and
they are improving it. They are bringing it up to date under the
leadership of the gentlelady from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins), and she is
joined by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis), and
everybody is coming together around that idea that says 529s need to be
protected and defended. And we need to make sure that they are kept up
to date, because back home this makes all the difference in the world.
I think this is one of these types of moments that is very significant
and that we can build on.
I thank the gentlelady for her leadership. I thank Mr. Davis for his,
and I rise in strong support of this measure.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3
minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois, I
thank the gentlelady, and I thank the Speaker.
It is good news to be able to come on the floor of the House and be
able to speak to hardworking parents and the basis of all of our joy
when we are giving an opportunity for our young people to be able to
participate in higher learning, in this instance, college education.
The 529 fix, if you will, deals with the savings accounts and tax-free
disbursements for the purpose of paying for college tuition, purchasing
college credits, and other qualified educational expenses.
I do want to join my colleague from Wisconsin and add that the idea
of other equipment dealing with the new technology special needs
services is crucial.
I want to thank Mr. Davis for his astute work in the committee,
looking to make this a little bit more balanced. Certainly we are
appreciative of those who have been successful and have achieved
financial success. I enjoy that. But I do think with our concern about
a deficit--which, by the way, has been reduced substantially under
President Barack Obama--that this idea that Mr. Davis had would have
been a worthy inclusion into this legislation.
However, I am grateful, again, that we are now high tech and the 529
accounts include computers and software as qualified educational
expenses. It would also allow for refunded tuition, educational
expenses, particularly if a student withdraws due to illness.
I was talking to one of my young people, college students, and also
my husband is a part of the team of higher education and sees it all
the time where youngsters leave because they are ill and fail to let
the professor know, and all of a sudden they are running up a bill.
I do want to say that this fix is urgent because we need to help
people save, but it is also urgent, Mr. Speaker, that we immediately
move to put the Homeland Security funding on the floor of the House. I
had asked yesterday for it to be immediately put on the floor of the
House last night or today in order to do our duty, and our duty is to
ensure the safety and security of this Nation.
It is sad for me to note that those like Border Patrol agents and ICE
agents and TSOs whom we pass by every day will be some of those who
will be unpaid. They are essential, and we will go past them and thank
them for their services--I often do in airports across America--but yet
we will stand here and not have a resolution and a solution to pay them
their salary.
We had a hearing today in Judiciary. I was very glad to note that I
think the weight was on the side of the President that he had
constitutional authority, that he is not rendering any immigration
status, that he is doing what he is allowed under the law; the Attorney
General is allowed to have discretion as to employment status; no
benefits will be conveyed on these individuals; and, frankly, we have
an emergency and we need to pass that bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. I yield an additional 2 minutes to
the gentlelady from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I won't take that. I thank the gentleman for his
kindness.
Let me just say that I think we appropriately are on the floor
dealing with H.R. 529. I again thank the work of the Committee on Ways
and Means ranking members and, as well, the ranking member and chairman
of the full committee.
But as we frame the work that this Congress must do, I don't know how
we stand here on Wednesday, 24 to 48 hours out from a collapse of the
Department of Homeland Security, no funding, and actually are here and
looking out at the face of first responders and those who are on the
front lines of borders, airports, FAA, ICE officers, and we would stand
and hold hostage these hardworking Americans who, in this climate when
we are looking to malls or we are hearing, seeing videos and various
charges of those who want to do harm, that we would not want an orderly
process for 5 million people who have about 14 items--14 items--that
they must comply with to even be eligible, but 5 million people who
simply want us to know that they are here and they are here to do good
and not to do harm. That is an orderly process for knowing how to
secure this Nation.
Again, I thank the gentleman from Illinois.
With that, I ask for a vote for H.R. 529 and H.R. 5 and the funding
of Homeland Security.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded not to traffic the

[[Page H1139]]

well while another Member is under recognition.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), our majority
leader.

{time} 1500

Mr. McCARTHY. I want to thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for
her work on 529 and bringing this bill to the floor.
Mr. Speaker, during the President's speech on the State of the Union,
he presented what he called ``middle class economics.'' It didn't take
long for people to realize that the President's plan meant taxing the
middle class to pay for bigger government and pipe dream projects.
Nothing demonstrated this anti-middle class agenda more than the
President's plan to attack education opportunity for middle class
families by taxing 529 saving accounts. Now, after families cried out
against the President's plan, he dropped it, and I am happy about that.
The President has rightly chosen to not do harm, but now he should work
with the House to do some positive good.
My wife and I have two children--Connor and Meghan. Connor is in
college today, and Meghan is a senior about to enter college. When we
found out, with joy, that we were to have children, we didn't have much
great wealth, but we started putting away $50 a month. Why? Because we
dreamt like every other American. It was no longer what you could
become but what opportunities your children will have.
Education has been the great equalizer in this country, and there is
no greater way to do that than by allowing those who may not have great
wealth but who have a great opportunity with their children to have a
529 account. But, like anything, we should modernize it because
education changes just as technology has changed.
Could you imagine today sending your children to college but telling
them to learn without having a computer? Isn't that a part of the
education system, too? That is what this 529 account will also expand
to. So, today, when we talk on the floor, it is really about the
future, but it is about the future of every single family from every
walk of life.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I differ with the President on many issues, and I
would say the majority of this House differs with the President in that
he would tax every parent or every grandparent who wanted to put away
for a brighter future for their child or grandchild. Luckily, he turned
back. Today is a chance to work with us, to work with us on a greater
America with something that is stronger. What that means today is that
we can all join so the 21st century can be even stronger, and we can
keep the promise we made to every American--that every generation will
improve on the generation before him. That is the opportunity that this
529 account gives us.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I have no further
requests for time, and I yield myself the balance of my time.
I agree with my colleague from Illinois (Mr. Roskam) that this is,
indeed, a bipartisan piece of legislation and that it is good for
higher education and for those who are attempting to access it.
I want to commend Ms. Jenkins and Mr. Kind for their leadership in
developing it. I agree with its purpose, and I urge its passage.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I would like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for
engaging in this informative and productive debate. If America is going
to remain competitive, I cannot imagine a more important thing than
maintaining the affordability of higher education. There is much to be
done, but today's vote is a critical and simple step that Congress
should take to empower folks to save for higher education and,
ultimately, to make it more attainable for more hardworking Americans.
I hope that Congress passes this legislation today with the broad
support that it deserves so that we can give American families an
improved way to invest in their 529 college savings plans.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, as a supporter of 529 college savings
plans--including the College Savings Plans of Maryland--I am pleased to
support today's legislation, which makes three common sense technical
changes to these valuable savings tools.
First, HR 529 makes the purchase of a computer and internet access a
qualified expense for 529 accounts, reflecting the reality that
computers and the internet are a modern necessity for today's college
students. Second, the bill allows students who receive refunds from
colleges to reinvest those refunds back into their 529 accounts,
provided that reinvestment occurs within 60 days of a student leaving
college. And finally, the bill eliminates the existing aggregation
requirement for purposes of calculating distributions that are
includible in a beneficiary's taxable income.
Mr. Speaker, unlike other tax bills that have come before us
recently, today's legislation does not seek to permanently extend
temporary provisions of the code without paying for that permanence--
and it does not add tens of billions of dollars to the national debt.
Rather, HR 529 makes several modest improvements to a program already
permanently authorized in law--and it does so at a much lower cost.
Accordingly, I will cast a yes vote.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I will vote for H.R. 529, a bill that
would expand section 529 college savings plans, when it passed the
House today. I strongly believe in improving access to higher
education, and encouraging families to save for college is a critical
part of this in an era of rising tuition costs and deepening student
debt. Since 1996, 529 plans have saved American families more than $225
billion. H.R. 529 makes several changes to update 529 plans, including
removing penalties for students who are forced to withdraw from college
and expanding the eligible uses. While I will vote for this bill, I
wish this Congress would do more. The cost of higher education
continues to increase and millions of American students carry non-
dischargeable debt that totals over $1 trillion. At the same time, my
Republican colleagues have slashed Pell grants, refused to provide
students with the low interest rates granted to America's biggest
banks, and continue to support predatory, for-profit institutions that
shortchange our most vulnerable students. I support the modest
improvements in H.R. 529, but I urge my colleagues to take up further
measures to improve access to college and reduce student loan debt.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 121, the previous question is ordered on
the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.

Motion to Recommit

Mr. TED LIEU of California. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit
at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. TED LIEU of California. I am opposed to it in its current form.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Ted Lieu of California moves to recommit the bill H.R.
529 to the Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to
report the same back to the House forthwith with the
following amendment:
Add at the end the following:

SEC. 5. PARENTS' RIGHT TO KNOW COST OF BROKERAGE FEES AND
IMPACT ON LONG-TERM SAVINGS.

Section 529(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended--
(1) by striking ``Reports.--Each officer'' and inserting
the following: ``Reports.--
``(1) In general.--Each officer'', and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Fees.--Each such officer or employee shall make an
annual report to each designated beneficiary of an account
under such program--
``(A) disclosing the type and amount of fees with respect
to such account,
``(B) demonstrating the impact of such fees on the
investment returns of such account over a 10-year and 20-year
period, and
``(C) disclosing the range of fees for investments
available to accounts under such program.''.

SEC. 6. RATES OF RETURN AND LOW FEES.

Section 529 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended
by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(g) Rates of Return and Low Fees.--Each officer or
employee having control of

[[Page H1140]]

the qualified tuition program shall take such steps as are
necessary to ensure, to the extent practicable, high rates of
return and low fees under such program.''.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
Mr. TED LIEU of California. Mr. Speaker, this is a final amendment to
the bill which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If
adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as
amended.
Let me start by thanking my Republican colleagues for introducing
this bill. It makes changes to 529 plans that many on my side of the
aisle have also been calling on for years. I support 529 plans, as do
many of my constituents. It helps people plan and pay for college, and
my wife and I currently invest in 529 plans.
There is one amendment to this bill that, I believe, will make it far
better, and that is disclosure. The motion to recommit would put in an
amendment that says that there has to be a separate report that talks
about the types and numbers of fees and how much these fees are and how
they impact the performance of the product over 10 to 20 years.
Prior to entering politics, I served as a corporate vice president at
a financial services company, and it is clear that the foundation upon
which Wall Street rests is disclosure. It is the social compact that
Wall Street has with Main Street. It is the compact that they have with
investors in that they will describe a product--how it works, the fees
on that product, and how it performs. By having a separate report that
parents can see, one that talks about the fees on these products and
how these fees impact the performance, it will allow middle class
families to better gauge for themselves how their investments are doing
and which investments to select. Does this makes a difference? Yes, it
does. Let me give you an example.
Savingforcollege.com offers this scenario:
If an annual return for a 529 account is 7 percent and if one account
charges 20 basis points and another charges 40 basis points, here is
the difference on an investment of $5,000: over the course of 18 years,
the 529 plan charging the lower fees will save the investor $542. The
underlying bill would change existing law to allow 529 funds to be used
to purchase a laptop computer for school, and $542 would allow you to
buy a laptop.
Right now, every State has different rules for disclosure, and they
have different fees. For example, in my State of California, we have
relatively low fees that range between $142 to $154 over 10 years, but
then you have States like Montana and Arkansas, which have some of the
highest low-end fees, which could range between $1,100 to $1,200 over
10 years. That makes a huge difference to middle class families.
I urge my colleagues to support this motion to recommit, which merely
provides disclosure to middle class families so they can better
understand their 529 plans.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a
point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The reservation of the point of order is
withdrawn.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to
the gentleman's motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the
motion to recommit.
This motion would do the exact opposite of what this legislation is
trying to accomplish. This bill is attempting to simplify 529s, but
this motion would add unneeded complexity, leading to fewer people
saving for a college education. It would burden all families who are
saving as well as burden States and plan administrators with more red
tape. As the former State treasurer of Kansas, I believe I can offer a
unique insight from my experiences with 529 plan administration.
This simply adds an undo administrative burden. It increases the
costs, which would leave less money for students to spend on their
higher education costs. It seems to mandate the increase of rates of
return, and Congress should not be in the business of setting the risk
of a personal investment. It increases administrative expenses, and it
goes in the opposite direction of the underlying bill. I urge my
colleagues to defeat this motion to recommit.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. TED LIEU of California. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas
and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by
5-minute votes on passage of the bill, if ordered; and agreeing to the
Speaker's approval of the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 176,
nays 243, not voting 13, as follows:

[Roll No. 89]

YEAS--176

Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Yarmuth

NAYS--243

Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (PA)
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Loudermilk
Love

[[Page H1141]]

Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOT VOTING--13

Byrne
Costa
Hinojosa
Lee
Long
Lynch
McNerney
Rice (NY)
Roe (TN)
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Speier
Wilson (FL)

{time} 1541

Mrs. BLACKBURN, Messrs. LABRADOR, ISSA, SANFORD, Ms. SINEMA, Messrs.
DUFFY, WALDEN, FLORES, and Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Announcement by the Speaker

The SPEAKER. The Chair wishes to reiterate the announcement of March
25, 2014, concerning floor practice.
Members should periodically rededicate themselves to the core
principles of proper parliamentary practice that are so essential in
maintaining order and deliberacy here in the House. The Chair believes
that a few of these principles bear emphasis today.
Members should refrain from trafficking in the well when another,
including the presiding officer, is addressing the House.
Members should wear appropriate business attire during all sittings
of the House, however brief their appearance on the floor may be.
Members should refrain from engaging in still photography or audio or
video recording in the Chamber. Taking unofficial photographs detracts
from the dignity of the proceedings and presents security and privacy
challenges for the House.
Members who wish to speak on the floor should respectfully seek and
obtain recognition from the presiding officer, taking the time to do so
in proper form, including 1-minutes. The proper form would be to ask
unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

{time} 1545

Members should take care to yield and reclaim time in an orderly
fashion, bearing in mind that the Official Reporters of Debate cannot
properly transcribe two Members simultaneously.
Members should address their remarks in debate to the presiding
officer and not to others in the second person or to some perceived
viewing audience.
Members should not embellish the offering of a motion, the entry of a
request, the making of a point of order, or the entry of an appeal with
any statement of motive or other commentary, and should be aware that
such utterances could render the motion, request, point of order, or
appeal untimely.
Members should attempt to come to the floor within the 15-minute
period as prescribed by the first ringing of the bells. This has been
an ongoing problem and Members should make every attempt to be here
within the prescribed 15 minutes. Members should be advised that if
they are in the Chamber attempting to vote, the Chair will try to
accommodate them. But as a point of courtesy to each of your
colleagues, voting within the allotted time would help with the
maintenance of the institution.
Following these basic standards of practice will foster an atmosphere
of mutual and institutional respect. It will ensure against personal
confrontation, among individual Members or between Members and the
presiding officer. It will facilitate Members' comprehension of, and
participation in, the business of the House. It will enable accurate
transcriptions of proceedings. In sum, it will ensure the comity that
elevates spirited deliberations above mere argument.
The Chair appreciates the attention of the Members to these matters.
Without objection, 5-minute voting will continue.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 401,
noes 20, not voting 11, as follows:

[Roll No. 90]

AYES--401

Abraham
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Ashford
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera
Beyer
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bost
Boustany
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clawson (FL)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Curbelo (FL)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graham
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Holding
Honda
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Knight
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
Lawrence
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Loudermilk
Love
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matsui
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Moore
Moulton
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Neal
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nolan
Norcross
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Olson
Palazzo
Pallone
Palmer
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (NC)
Price, Tom
Quigley
Rangel

[[Page H1142]]

Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Russell
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Trott
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOES--20

Clarke (NY)
Ellison
Fudge
Grijalva
Hastings
Hoyer
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
McCollum
Napolitano
Pocan
Richmond
Rush
Schrader
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Visclosky
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman

NOT VOTING--11

Byrne
Costa
Hinojosa
Lee
Long
McNerney
Rice (NY)
Roe (TN)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Speier
Wilson (FL)

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Poe of Texas) (during the vote). There
are 2 minutes remaining.

{time} 1552

Ms. BASS changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

personal explanation

Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote today because
of a serious illness in my family. Had I been present, I would have
voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 84, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 85, ``yea''
on rollcall No. 86, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 87, ``yea'' on rollcall No.
88, ``no'' on rollcall No. 89, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 90.

____________________