I 
110TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 2690 
To address rising college tuition by strengthening the compact between the 
States, the Federal Government, and institutions of higher education 
to make college more affordable. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JUNE 12, 2007 
Mr. TIERNEY (for himself, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. HINOJOSA, 
Ms. MCCOLLUM of Minnesota, Mr. BISHOP of New York, Ms. CLARKE, 
Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. COHEN, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. DAVIS of 
Illinois, Mr. ELLISON, Mr. EMANUEL, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. AL GREEN of 
Texas, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. HOLT, Mr. 
JEFFERSON, Mr. KUCINICH, Ms. LEE, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mrs. 
MALONEY of New York, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. MCGOVERN, 
Mr. NADLER, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. ORTIZ, Mr. PAYNE, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, 
Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. STARK, Ms. WATSON, Mr. WEXLER, and Ms. 
WOOLSEY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Com-
mittee on Education and Labor 
A BILL 
To address rising college tuition by strengthening the com-
pact between the States, the Federal Government, and 
institutions of higher education to make college more 
affordable. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
22:07 Jun 14, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2690.IH
H2690
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 
‘‘College Affordability and Accountability Act’’. 
(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.— 
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 
Sec. 2. References; effective date. 
Sec. 3. Findings. 
Sec. 4. State commitment to affordable college education. 
‘‘Sec. 132. State commitment to affordable college education. 
Sec. 5. Cost containment strategies. 
‘‘Sec. 133. Cost containment strategies. 
Sec. 6. Pell Plus. 
‘‘Sec. 401A. Incentives and rewards: Pell Plus. 
Sec. 7. Cooperative education rewards for institutions that restrain tuition in-
creases. 
‘‘TITLE VIII—COOPERATIVE EDUCATION REWARDS FOR 
INSTITUTIONS THAT RESTRAIN TUITION INCREASES 
‘‘Sec. 801. Statement of purpose; eligible institutions. 
‘‘Sec. 802. Authorization of appropriations; reservations. 
‘‘Sec. 803. Grants for cooperative education. 
‘‘Sec. 804. Demonstration and innovation projects; training and resource 
centers; and research. 
Sec. 8. Study. 
Sec. 9. Articulation agreement demonstration program. 
‘‘Sec. 486A. Articulation agreement demonstration program. 
Sec. 10. Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. 
SEC. 2. REFERENCES; EFFECTIVE DATE. 
(a) REFERENCE.—Whenever in this Act an amend-
ment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment 
to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference 
shall be considered to be made to a section or other provi-
sion of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 
et seq.). 
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Except as otherwise provided 
in this Act, the amendments made by this Act shall take 
effect on the date of enactment of this Act. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
22:07 Jun 14, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2690.IH
H2690
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
SEC. 3. FINDINGS. 
The Congress finds the following: 
(1) A quality college degree is the cornerstone 
of the American dream, opening the door to job op-
portunity and professional fulfillment, while increas-
ing earning power by more than a million dollars 
over a lifetime; therefore, States and the Federal 
Government should do more to make it affordable 
and accessible to all qualified students because— 
(A) recent shifts in the economy have in-
creased the demand for college-educated work-
ers and increased the wage gap between college- 
educated workers and those without a degree: 
in 2005, male college graduates earned 63 per-
cent more than male high school graduates and 
female college graduates had earnings that were 
70 percent higher than their counterparts with 
high school diplomas; 
(B) the country is projected to a have a 
shortage of college-educated workers in the 
coming years, which may reach as high as 12 
million workers by 2020; 
(C) low-income students have an annual 
unmet need for student financial assistance of 
$4,689 in college expenses at public colleges— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
00:28 Jun 16, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2690.IH
H2690
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
expenses not covered by grants, loans, work, or 
family savings; and 
(D) 50 percent of students work more than 
20 hours a week, while research shows that 
working less than 15 hours per week improves 
academic achievement and retention in college. 
(2) The proportion of State spending used on 
higher education has decreased dramatically over 
time, and as a result, students and their families, 
particularly working class and middle class families, 
have to pay a larger portion of college costs: 
(A) From the 2001–2002 to the 2006– 
2007 school year, tuition rose by 35 percent at 
four-year public institutions, 23 percent at pub-
lic two year institutions and 11 percent at pri-
vate four-year institutions. 
(B) Even after receiving financial aid, 
Americans find it increasingly difficult to pay 
for college. The percentage of a family’s income 
needed to pay for college after financial aid has 
increased for all families, but particularly for 
low-income families. Compared to 1992, low in-
come families needed to use an additional 16 
percent of their income to pay for an education 
at a four year public college, middle class fami-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
22:07 Jun 14, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2690.IH
H2690
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
lies an additional 5 percent, while wealthy fami-
lies needed to use an additional 1 percent in 
2005. 
(3) Federal student aid is too focused on loans 
instead of grant aid because— 
(A) loans represented 52 percent of all fi-
nancial aid to undergraduate students in the 
2005–2006 school year, the highest proportion 
in recent years; 
(B) the share of the average cost at a pub-
lic four-year institution, which could be met by 
a Pell Grant, declined from 42 percent to 33 
percent from the 2001–2002 to 2005–2006 
school year; 
(C) in constant 2005 dollars, the value of 
the maximum Pell Grant declined by $298 be-
tween the 2002–2003 and 2005–2006 school 
year; and 
(D) 
average 
student 
indebtedness 
is 
$17,500 and up to a quarter of students use 
credit cards to pay for their education. 
SEC. 4. STATE COMMITMENT TO AFFORDABLE COLLEGE 
EDUCATION. 
Title I is amended by inserting after section 131 (20 
U.S.C. 1015) the following new section: 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
22:07 Jun 14, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H2690.IH
H2690
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS