Happening Now: Despite Shutdown, Education Department Staff Press Forward with Negotiated Rulemaking
- Matthew Feehan
- 8 minutes ago
- 4 min read
On July 25, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education ("DoED," "ED" or "Department") published in the Federal Register its formal notice of intent to establish two negotiated-rulemaking committees—one to address federal student-loan programs and another to tackle institutional and programmatic accountability. This process, mandated by the recently enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act (Pub. L. 119-21), reflects Congress’s directive to modernize the entire Title IV framework, from loan limits and repayment-plan consolidation to the creation of the new Workforce Pell Grant and a revised accountability system for institutions. In short, it is arguably the most consequential regulatory re-write of U.S. education rules since 2008, setting the stage for a series of reforms projected to take effect beginning July 1, 2026.
To carry out this mandate, the Department established two formal committees under its Negotiated Rulemaking ("NegReg"): the Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE) Committee (meeting now) and the Accountability in Accountability in Higher Education and Access through Demand-driven Workforce Pell (AHEAD) Committee (meeting in December and January). The RISE Committee is focused primarily on the loan side—phase-outs of Graduate and Parent PLUS programs, new annual and lifetime borrowing caps, repayment-plan simplification, and borrower rehabilitation—while the AHEAD Committee addresses institutional accountability, Pell Grant eligibility, and the rollout of the new much-anticipated short-term Workforce Pell program.
The RISE Committee represents a broad coalition of perspectives across the higher-education and lending landscape. Its membership includes representatives of student loan borrowers—including those in repayment, deferment, or default—alongside veterans and military-service organizations, such as Student Veterans of America and the National Defense Committee. The committee also brings in state higher-education officials, public, private nonprofit, and proprietary institutions, student-loan servicers and guaranty agencies, legal aid and consumer-rights advocates, and organizations representing taxpayers and the public interest. Collectively, these negotiators embody the full ecosystem of stakeholders affected by Title IV reform, ensuring that the Department’s draft regulations are informed by those most directly impacted. A by-name roster can be downloaded below.
As just a few examples of the kinds of items this Committee will review, draft, edit, debate, and ultimately vote for consensus on, today's meeting has been highly focused on defining:
"Program of Study;"
"Professional Student (668.2 of Title 34 C.F.R.);"
"Professional Degree;"
"On time"—the latter specifically in relation to the Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP), including matching principal payments, loan-forgiveness timelines, and interest subsidies.
During today's session, Ashley Naporlee, Lead Attorney with the Consumer Protection Team at the Legal Aid Society of San Diego—representing legal assistance organizations that advocate for students, borrowers, and civil rights groups—raised concerns that the Department’s draft language could disincentivize borrowers from making larger or earlier payments than those required under the proposed Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP).
Conversely, Alexander Holt, Senior Advisor on Higher Education for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, speaking on behalf of U.S. taxpayers and the public interest, expressed confidence that the Department’s draft language “got it right.”
While the public can watch the negotiations live, the Department’s official website has not been updated due to the ongoing government shutdown ("Notice: Lapse of Appropriations
Due to a lapse of appropriations, information on this website may not be monitored or maintained. Inquiries may not receive a response until appropriations are enacted.")
Even so, the Department has made clear efforts to maintain accessibility and transparency. Live sign-language interpretation has been provided for viewers requiring accommodations, and staff have been diligent in identifying the exact sections and subsections of the regulations under discussion—an invaluable aid for those following the proceedings remotely as the Committee works through dense and highly technical provisions in real time.
Notably, two separate caucuses have been called during Tuesday’s Session II of the RISE Committee, signaling that negotiators are grappling with complex points of disagreement and seeking alignment within their respective constituencies before reconvening in open session. The tone remains professional and solution-oriented, but the frequency of caucuses underscores just how consequential these definitions and draft provisions have become.
For policy observers and regulatory wonks alike, this negotiation process is fascinating. But in the wake of sweeping legislative changes enacted by Congress, it has become even more consequential. The second- and third-order effects of these reforms will ripple across institutions, borrowers, and taxpayers alike.
That’s what makes the Department’s ongoing work so remarkable. Despite the government shutdown and the paralysis of congressional gridlock, ED’s dedicated public servants continue to show up—working late, listening closely, and negotiating in good faith with representatives from every constituency to ensure that all voices are heard as the Department moves toward final rulemaking later this year. Their professionalism and commitment to the process are a reminder that even in difficult circumstances, good governance depends on people who care enough to get it right.
Cheers to them all.
About the Author
Matthew Feehan, J.D. is a U.S. Army National Guard veteran and former infantry officer with more than a decade of combined military, legal, and federal contracting experience. A former Department of Justice Honors Law Clerk and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Law Clerk and Operations Officer, Feehan has served across nearly every corner of the federal system—as a contractor, civil servant, and soldier—working on matters that span regulatory policy, administrative law, and complex federal procurement. His firsthand experience navigating the same statutes and rulemaking processes that govern veterans’ benefits gives his writing a uniquely practical edge.
Today, Feehan serves as a Senior Policy Advisor with the Veterans Education Project (VEP), a Board Member and Sergeant-at-Arms of Combat Veterans of America (CVA), and an independent consultant specializing in ethics, compliance, and veterans’ policy. His work explores how law and regulation collide with the lived experience of those who serve—bridging the gap between policy intent and on-the-ground impact for veterans, families, and the public institutions charged with supporting them.
