information about Government Student Loan.
Among life's few certainties are that many politicians will be pro-education
while campaigning only to forget the pledge once elected. But few appear to
experience such total amnesia as George W. Bush.
Indeed, given the fact that student-loan debt now averages nearly $17,000
and 39 percent of borrowers face unmanageable debt after college --
according to a report from The Higher Education Project of State Public
Interest Research Groups -- it's simply amazing that the Bushies recently
proposed eliminating one of the few relief measures available to borrowers,
the federal fixed-rate loan-consolidation program. As Terry Hartle, vice
president of government and public affairs at the American Council of
Education (ACE), explained, "It is hard to imagine a less desirable
graduation present for college students than having to pay dramatically
higher student-loan rates."
The Bush administration anticipated a $100 billion budget deficit this year,
including a $1.3 billion shortfall in the Pell Grant program, which provides
aid for low-income students. Apparently it thought eliminating the
fixed-rate guarantee would remedy the situation by saving $1.3 billion,
which could then be used to fund the Pell shortfall. Almost immediately,
however, members of Congress from both parties and a slew of education
interest groups began criticizing the proposal. The bipartisan outcry forced
the administration to withdraw the idea, leaving many shaking their heads
over the folly. As Democratic Representative Jose Serrano of New York told
The Associated Press, "It's so easy for me to get up in front of the cameras
and say, 'Mr. President, this is about the future of our country.' The
politics of it I can't figure out because those boys at the White House are
pretty shrewd, but this one is a dumb move."
It's dumb because the notion of ending the consolidation program makes the
president and Republicans appear anti-education, even though the ACE's
Hartle said the GOP has had a good record of supporting the Pell Grant
program. Plus, they had every reason to know better. "The Republicans tried
to do the same thing in 1995 with the 'Contract with America' and it turned
into a fiasco," Hartle explained. "Now they run the risk of doing [it] again
by painting themselves into a corner and appearing insensitive to
education."
The long-term effects of the Bush proposal will linger, most likely sparking
a wave of campaign commercials and rhetoric. The White House cannot afford
to seem anti-education given the topic's popularity with voters. Democrats
needed to find a campaign issue that resonates, given Bush's high approval
ratings and the public's general happiness with the status quo in the
post-September 11 world, and the administration may have just handed it to
them.
Plus, the Pell grant issue also lets Democrats into tax-cut territory. In a
public statement, Congressman George Miller of California made a connection
that the Bush administration hoped voters would not. "The administration
would not need to consider raising the cost of college for working and
middle-income families if it had not insisted on a trillion dollar tax cut
for rich people as its highest domestic priority . Americans should insist
that the administration and Congress fund the Pell program and continue the
consolidated-loan program as well." And Democrats should insist that their
leadership make a big deal out of the administration's blooper on education.
- Why should money be taken from me and my family. Pulled off our plates - to
give to a whiny 18 year old who doesn't want to pay for his or her
education? You want to go to a 10,000 dollar a year school? Get rich parents
or go into debt.
The