CubinNY wrote:The legislative fix is to offer grants in aid as a replacement for student loans to subsidize higher education at a level that does not place a higher burden on the institutions to seek funding through FTE tuition.
During the Clinton Administration, one of the biggest giveaways to Newt was to alter the way higher education is funded. My first two years of college most of my tuition was paid for by need-based scholarships. After the GOP took over the House that all ended with Clinton's "The era of big government is over speech." The last two years of undergrad, I'm still paying for along with graduate school and my Doctoral program.
Yea, the funding method doesn't make sense. The federal government basically backs via loans an unlimited ability to get loans (the direct loans are capped, but parent plus loans are basically unlimited, just tell us what you want). Then the universities set their price because the loans are basically a blank check (including the ability of just hike prices each year).
It should look much more like medicare/medicaid where a government agency sets a reimbursement rate. Unlike medicare/medicaid though, it just needs to be enough of the size of the total education market that the fed government exerts price control, even if indirectly on the population that isn't subsidized.
I'd also say leave this totally focused on the tuition portion. As it relates to room and board, let the free market reign. The private market isn't going to loan wads of money for non federally backed loans for non educational extras. Those would be dischargeable debt through bankruptcy like any other private loan. Totally separate to all this, push progrssive policy on things like miminum wage and your average student might actually be able to work their way through the room and board aspect while the actual education component is subsidized full/significantly.