59–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 110–112 

TO EXTEND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE 

ACCESS ACT OF 1999 

APRIL 30, 2007.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. WAXMAN, from the Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 1124] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Officel 

The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to whom 

was referred the bill (H.R. 1124) to extend the District of Columbia 

College Access Act of 1999, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 

do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 00 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 00 

Legislative History .................................................................................................. 00 

Section-by-Section .................................................................................................... 00 

Committee Consideration.. ...................................................................................... 00 

Rollcall Votes ............................................................................................................ 00 

Application of Law to the Legislative Branch ....................................................... 00 

Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee ...... 00 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives .................................... 00 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 00 

Federal Advisory Committee Act ............................................................................ 00 

Unfunded Mandates Statement .............................................................................. 00 

Earmark Identification ............................................................................................ 00 

Committee Estimate ................................................................................................ 00 

Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate .................... 00 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill as Reported ...................................... 00 

Additional Views ...................................................................................................... 00 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

2 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

H.R. 1124, a bill to extend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999, was introduced on February 16, 2007, by Rep. 

Tom Davis and cosponsored by Rep. Danny K. Davis and Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton. 

The bill reauthorizes for an additional five years the District of 

Columbia Tuition Assistance Grant Program (DCTAG). DCTAG 

will expire on September 30, 2007, unless reauthorized. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

In 1999, Congress passed P.L. 106–98, the District of Columbia 

College Access Act, authorizing the establishment of a Tuition Assistance Grant Program (DCTAG) in the nation’s capital. DCTAG 

provides limited financial assistance to D.C. high school graduates 

pursuing higher education opportunities in other states. The original legislation authorized funding for the program for five years 

(FY00–FY05). In 2004, Congress reauthorized the College Access 

Act for an additional two years, through fiscal year 2007. 

The purpose of the District of Columbia College Access Act is to 

address the District of Columbia’s lack of a state university system 

by providing D.C. high school graduates with access to higher education opportunities available to residents of other states. The District of Columbia is not a state and does not have a state education 

system to provide affordable higher education opportunities for its 

high school graduates. 

Additionally, the legislation was to deter tax-paying families in 

the District from moving to surrounding states in order to take advantage of in-state higher education options available to residents 

in other states. Such moves had been depriving the District of 

much needed tax revenue. 

DCTAG, administered by the mayor of the District of Columbia, 

authorizes the federal government to provide tuition scholarships 

to District high school graduates. Under the program, District students may attend public colleges or universities in the United 

States at or near the in-state tuition rate or receive $2,500 annually to attend certain private colleges within the Washington Metropolitan area or private Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Funding under DCTAG is capped at $10,000 per 

year for public colleges, with a lifetime cap of $50,000 total per student. DCTAG serves as a substitute for an expanded university 

system in the District, which has only one public university, the 

University of the District of Columbia. 

DCTAG has doubled the total number of District students attending college since 1999–2000, the school year before the program started. For the most recent school year, 2005–2006, DCTAG 

provided over $30 million in college scholarships for over 4,700 students enrolled in universities and colleges in 45 states, the District 

of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. To date the program has 

assisted 11,000 students. 

DCTAG is currently funded at $33 million. The President’s budget and the District of Columbia’s budget propose increasing funding 

for the program to $35.1 million for FY 2008. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

3 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

H.R. 1124 was introduced on February 16, 2007, and referred to 

the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 

The Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and the 

District of Columbia, held a hearing on the bill on March 22, 2007. 

On March 27, 2007, the Subcommittee held a markup to consider 

H.R. 1124, and forwarded the bill to Full Committee by voice-vote. 

On March 29, 2007, the Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform held a markup to consider H.R. 1124, and ordered the bill 

reported by voice vote. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION

Section 1. 5-Year reauthorization of Tuition Assistance Programs 

This section would reauthorize the Tuition Assistance Grant Program for an additional five years, through fiscal year 2012. This 

section would amend sections 3(i) and 5(f) of the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 by striking ‘‘each of the 7 succeeding 

fiscal years’’ and inserting ‘‘each of the 12 succeeding fiscal years.’’

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On March 29, 2007, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a markup to consider H.R. 1124, and ordered the 

bill reported by voice-vote. 

ROLLCALL VOTES

No rollcall votes were held. 

APPLICATION OF LAW TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104–1 requires a description of 

the application of this bill to the legislative branch where the bill 

relates to terms and conditions of employment or access to public 

services and accommodations. This bill provides limited financial 

assistance to D.C. high school graduates pursuing higher education 

opportunities in colleges and universities in other states. Legislative branch employees and their families, to the extent that they 

are otherwise eligible for the benefits provided by this legislation, 

have equal access to its benefits. 

STATEMENT OF OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF

THE COMMITTEE

In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause (2)(b)(1) 

of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee’s oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the 

descriptive portions of this report. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee’s performance goals and 

objectives are reflected in the descriptive portions of this report, 

and include addressing D.C.’s lack of a state university system by 

providing limited financial assistance to D.C. high school graduates 

pursuing higher education opportunities in other states. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

4 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Under clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 

Representatives, the Committee must include a statement citing 

the specific powers granted to Congress to enact the law proposed 

by H.R. 1124. Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution of 

the United States grants Congress the power to enact this law. 

FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT

The Committee finds that the legislation does not establish or 

authorize the establishment of an advisory committee within the 

definition of 5 U.S.C. App., Section 5(b). 

UNFUNDED MANDATES STATEMENT

Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act (as amended by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, P.L. 104–4) requires a statement on whether the 

provisions of the report include unfunded mandates. In compliance 

with this requirement the Committee has received a letter from the 

Congressional Budget Office included herein. 

EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

H.R. 1124 does not include any congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), 

or 9(f) of rule XXI. 

COMMITTEE ESTIMATE

Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs that would be incurred in carrying out H.R. 

1124. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its 

report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of 

the Congressional Budget Act. 

BUDGET AUTHORITY AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST

ESTIMATE

With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of 

the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect to requirements 

of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 

Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 1124 

from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 1124—A bill to extend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 

Summary: H.R. 1124 would amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 and reauthorize the District of Columbia 

tuition assistance grant (DCTAG) program for students who are 

residents of Washington, D.C. Current law authorizes the appropriation of such sums as may be necessary through fiscal year 

2007, and H.R. 1124 would extend this authorization through fiscal 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

5 

year 2012. CBO estimates that the necessary appropriations would 

total $208 million over the 2008–2012 period. Outlays would match 

this total over the same period. Enacting the bill would have no 

significant impact on direct spending or revenues. 

H.R. 1124 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1124 is presented in the following table. The 

cost of this legislation falls within budget function 500 (education, 

training, employment, and social services). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

Spending Under Current Law: 

Budget Authority 1 ............................................................... 33 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 33 0 0 0 0 0 

Proposed Changes: 

Estimated Authorization Level ............................................. 0 30 41 44 46 47 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 0 30 41 44 46 47 

Spending Under H.R. 1124: 

Estimated Authorization Level 1 .......................................... 33 30 41 44 46 47 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 33 30 41 44 46 47 

1 The 2007 level is the amount appropriated for that year for the D.C. tuition assistance program. 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 

1124 will be enacted during 2007 and that the estimated amounts 

will be appropriated for each year. 

Current law 

Under current law, DCTAG provides financial assistance to D.C. 

residents who attend public colleges outside of the District of Columbia, private postsecondary institutions in the District of Columbia, Maryland, or Virginia, or any historically black college or university. The private-school tuition grants are restricted to nonprofit 

institutions. Students who attend public schools receive assistance 

equal to the difference between the tuition paid by residents of the 

state in which the institution is located and the tuition charged to 

nonresident students, with an annual limit of $10,000 and a lifetime limit of $50,000. Private-school students receive a $2,500 maximum annual grant, with a lifetime limit of $12,500. 

According to data from the District of Columbia’s State Education Office (SEO), the cost of DCTAG has grown substantially 

since the program’s inception (academic year 2000–2001). For the 

2005–2006 academic year, the most recent year for which final data 

are available, just over 3,800 students attending public institutions 

and 900 students attending private schools received awards. Both 

the number of participants and the size of average award have increased over time. Growth has been particularly high for students 

attending public schools. 

Current law authorizes the appropriation of such sums as may 

be necessary through fiscal year 2007. The Congress appropriated 

$33 million for this program in fiscal year 2007, although costs will 

likely exceed this total. Because costs for DCTAG were lower than 

the appropriated sums during the early years of the program, however, the SEO has been able to use carryover funds to supplement 

appropriated funds to make grants in recent years. As a result, the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

6 

SEO has about $42 million available for the current academic year. 

The office has allocated just over $39 million for this award-year, 

but because not all students who receive award letters enroll in 

school, SEO’s spending for financial assistance will likely be closer to $35 million. SEO also spends about 3 percent of its funds on operating costs. 

Proposed extension 

H.R. 1124 would authorize the appropriation of such sums as are 

necessary for DCTAG through 2012. CBO assumes that the SEO 

would use all of its estimated $7 million in carryover funds in 2008, 

so while program costs would probably total almost $38 million, additional federal funds needed to cover those costs would total only 

$30 million. CBO estimates that the necessary appropriations and 

resulting outlays would total $208 million over the 2008–2012 period. (Federal funds are disbursed and outlays are recorded when 

the SEO receives the funds, not when it actually makes the 

grants.) Based on population and high school graduation projections from the Census Bureau and the National Center for Education Statistics, respectively, CBO estimates that the number of 

participants would continue to grow, but at a slower rate than in 

the early years of the program. In addition, some of the early 

growth was likely attributable to recruitment efforts, which would 

be expected to have a smaller effect as DCTAG matures. 

CBO estimates that a total of about 5,500 students annually 

would participate in the program by 2012. Based on data from the 

SEO and the College Board, CBO also estimates that the average 

cost per grant would continue to rise as the cost of tuition and fees 

at both public and private schools rises, although a growing share 

of the grants would be limited by the annual caps. On that basis, 

CBO estimates that the average cost per grant would reach $9,500 

for public schools and about $2,350 for private schools by 2012, assuming appropriation of the necessary funds. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1124 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Previous CBO estimate: On March 14, 2007, CBO transmitted a 

cost estimate for S. 343, a bill to extend the District of Columbia 

College Access Act of 1999, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on February 15, 2007 . That bill also would authorize the appropriation 

of such sums as may be necessary for the tuition assistance program through fiscal year 2012. The estimated costs for S. 342 are 

identical to those for H.R. 1124. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Justin Humphrey. Impact 

on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Lisa Ramirez-Branum. 

Impact on the Private Sector: Fatimot Ladipo. 

Estimate approved by: Peter A. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitmstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

7 

ted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

TITLE XXXVIII OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

OFFICIAL CODE 

* * * * * * * 

SUBTITLE IX—COLLEGE ACCESS ASSISTANCE 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 27—COLLEGE ACCESS ASSISTANCE 

* * * * * * * 

§ 38–2702. Public school program 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated to the District of Columbia to carry out this section 

$12,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and (subject to 38-2706) such sums 

as may be necessary for each of the ø7¿ 12 succeeding fiscal years. 

Such funds shall remain available until expended. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 38–2704. Private school program 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated to the District of Columbia to carry out this section 

$5,000,000 for fiscal year 2000 and (subject to 38-2706) such sums 

as may be necessary for each of the ø7¿ 12 succeeding fiscal years. 

Such funds shall remain available until expended. 

* * * * * * * 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

(8) 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF RANKING MEMBER TOM DAVIS 

We have traveled a long road with the District of Columbia College Access Act—from initial introduction on March 1, 1999 until 

today. That journey took us through the predecessor Subcommittee, 

which I then chaired, to the full Government Reform Committee, 

to the House and Senate Floor, and then to the White House, 

where President Bill Clinton signed the measure on November 12, 

1999. Every step of the way, the bill to create the D.C. Tuition Assistance Grant Program was unanimously approved on voice votes. 

President Clinton included sufficient money in his budget submission that year, and a Statement of Administration Policy endorsed 

the approach we had taken in authorizing use of those funds. 

We should be deeply proud of the determined, bi-partisan effort 

which resulted in enactment of this measure and its reauthorization two years ago. Then, as now, we are grateful for the support 

of our Senate colleagues, particularly Senators Warner, Voinovich 

and Durbin. And city leaders have embraced the program and 

made it the success we know today. Both former D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams and the current Mayor, Adrian Fenty, have been 

strong supporters, and we appreciate their continued advocacy on 

behalf of the City’s students. 

This law is a classic example of leveling of the playing field. 

Since the program went into effect, the graduation rate for public 

school students in the city has doubled. All District students have 

another strong incentive to stay in school. 

The five-year reauthorization before us today will enable District 

residents to continue to attend colleges and universities throughout 

the nation at in-state rates. The President’s Fiscal Year 2008 Budget includes sufficient funds to make that happen. No state, county 

or city is required to supplement its in-state tuition rate with local 

funds. This is a unique and highly successful federal investment. 

Suggestions to cap that investment or require funds from the City 

would penalize that success. 

In March of 1999, just after we introduced the first bill, Ms. Norton and I went to nearby Eastern High School to talk with students 

about their hopes for the future. I will never forget them. It was 

deeply moving. Many took our hands, looked deep into our eyes, 

and told us how much they wanted the opportunity to pursue higher learning. Their trust and the hopes of so many future District 

students hungry to seize their futures rest on what we do here 

today. 

I’m proud of all we have been able to accomplish for, and with, 

the Nation’s Capital since 1995, when the city was literally bankrupt. Economic development, public safety, the real estate market, 

and so many other aspects of city life have changed for the better. 

But nothing has given me more satisfaction than working to improve the range of options for the District’s students. Fighting for 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

9 

equal educational opportunity is one of the reasons I entered public 

life. 

We need a healthy city to have a healthy Metropolitan Washington Region. Reauthorizing this law, which has expanded higher 

educational choices, is an enormous leap forward. It is a critical 

element of our strategic vision for a vibrant future. 

TOM DAVIS. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING