A Democratic bill with 18 Democratic cosponsors · See all 18 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill creates State-Federal partnerships aimed at helping students attend in-state public colleges without debt. It sets up grant programs for states, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) to cover students' unmet financial needs. The legislation caps tuition and fees at participating institutions to prevent runaway price hikes. Additionally, the bill expands Federal Pell Grant eligibility to include DREAMer students who meet specific criteria. Finally, it establishes federal oversight offices and reporting requirements to ensure participating states and schools follow the rules.
Yes· 3 of 14
- Scored +10
Would students be better off under this?
The bill is fundamentally designed to provide debt-free higher education to students.
- Scored +10
Does this make college cost less?
The bill creates a massive investment to enable debt-free college at public institutions.
- Scored +9
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill specifically aims to support low-income and underserved students through financial aid and success programs.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Debt-Free Higher Education Opportunities: Section 499A-3 and Section 499A-5 establish grants for states to cover the unmet financial need of eligible students, giving individuals the chance to attend in-state public colleges without debt.
-
Support for DREAMer Students: Section 4 of the bill amends federal law to allow DREAMer students who meet specific educational, age of entry, or military service requirements to be eligible for Federal Pell Grants and Title IV financial aid.
-
Targeted Aid for HBCUs and MSIs: Section 3 creates a grant program under Section 372 for Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Tribal Colleges and Universities, and other Minority-Serving Institutions to provide need-based financial aid and cover unmet student needs.
-
Tuition and Fee Caps: Section 499A-4 and Section 3 require participating states and eligible institutions to cap tuition and fees at current levels, permitting only yearly increases based on the Consumer Price Index.
-
Student Success Services: Section 499A-5 mandates that a portion of grant funds be used for student success programs, such as hiring additional counselors, providing tutoring, and offering microgrants to help low-income students graduate.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Strict Compliance and Loss of Eligibility: Section 499A-7 and Section 3 outline penalties where states or institutions that breach program terms can be placed on probation, fined, or have their funding revoked, which could disrupt financial aid for students if a school loses eligibility.
-
Restrictions on Aid Distribution Priorities: Section 499A-5 requires states to disburse remaining funds to non-Pell Grant recipients based on state-determined priorities, potentially leaving some students with unmet financial needs if funds run out.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would students be better off under this? — The bill is fundamentally designed to provide debt-free higher education to students. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill greatly expands opportunities for Dreamer students by providing Pell Grant eligibility. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill specifically aims to support low-income and underserved students through financial aid and success programs. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill includes a specific grant program for HBCUs and other Predominantly Black Institutions. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides specific support for Hispanic-serving institutions and Dreamer students. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides support for Tribal Colleges and Universities. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — The bill directly benefits young adults entering higher education by reducing debt. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — It may reduce the financial burden of higher education for many families.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill provides dedicated funding and support for HBCUs and other minority-serving institutions. Does this make child care cost less? — The bill allows funds to be used for student success programs that include childcare assistance. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — By providing debt-free higher education, the bill helps reduce long-term financial burdens for low-income students.
- Education And Technology
- Does this make college cost less? — The bill creates a massive investment to enable debt-free college at public institutions. Does this reduce what student borrowers owe or repay? — The bill focuses on preventing debt rather than traditional loan forgiveness.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill increases federal oversight and provides significant federal funding to states for higher education.
- 10/15/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/16/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 17 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
5 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Becca BalintDemocrat · Vermont
Yvette ClarkeDemocrat · New York
Judy ChuDemocrat · California
Donald DavisDemocrat · North Carolina
Cleo FieldsDemocrat · Louisiana
Vicente GonzalezDemocrat · Texas
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Daniel GoldmanDemocrat · New York
Pramila JayapalDemocrat · Washington
Zoe LofgrenDemocrat · California
Ted LieuDemocrat · California
Morgan McGarveyDemocrat · Kentucky
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Chellie PingreeDemocrat · Maine
Ayanna PressleyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Bonnie Watson ColemanDemocrat · New Jersey