Right on schedule, it appears the House is ready to reform the student loan system, one of President Obama's most important policy priorities. Reports in Washington verify that the House leaders will put the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009 (H.R. 3221) to a full vote as soon as today.

While it faces a tougher road in the Senate, House Democrats are expected to approve the legislation overwhelmingly. That's because the reforms make a ton of economic and moral sense. Currently, the federal government subsidizes the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program to the tune of $55 billion a year. In turn, private insurance companies administer the loans, which are identical to the government's Direct Loan Program. Even with the government backing, lenders dish out those subsidized loans with high interest rates and massive late fees. Those practices are unjustified, though, considering how little risk the loans carry. After all, even bankrupt  borrowers can't discharge their accumulated debt.

SAFRA would phase out these subsidies and instead redirect most of the resources into its government lending program, saving the government an estimated $13 billion. The dollars they will save will be used to expand the Pell Grant program and create new programs to boost community college budgets, increase college completion rates, and improve early childhood education. Sounds good, right?

Not according to Republican Rep. Judy Biggert, who voted down the measure in committee this past July, likely because of pressure from the banks who would lose their lending business after the change. We are going to keep a close eye on the roll call to see if in a state that's currently cutting need-based scholarships, our legislators stand with students or with the banks who pad their campaign coffers.

UPDATE (3:25 PM): Not only did Biggert side with the banks, but six of her Republican colleagues in Illinois did as well. H.R. 3221 passed moments ago by a 253-171 margin. Rep. Tim Johnson (R-15th)  was one of just six GOPers to cross party lines and vote in favor of the bill. The rest, including U.S. Senate candidate Mark Kirk, voted no.