Obama Sees the Light (Well, He Sees Part of It)

by James A. Bacon

Give President Obama a modicum of credit: He finally recognizes that there’s more to increasing the affordability of higher education than shoveling tens of billions of federal scholarships and loans at students. Someone also has to constrain the increasing tuitions. Yesterday, the president warned colleges and universities to cut costs or risk losing some of their federal aid.

Schools can’t just “jack up tuition every single year” and simply expect people to pay it, Obama said. “If you can’t stop tuition from going up, the funding you get from taxpayers every year will go down.”

It’s not clear from the wire story I’m quoting from whether or not Obama understands there is a direct causal effect between the stupendous increases in federally backed loans he advocates and the high tuition rate he dercies. Regardless, his warning to college presidents reflects a welcome change in thinking.

College and university officials are in an absolute tizzy, reports USA Today. On the one hand, I can’t blame them. The federal government excercises so much power in the higher-ed marketplace, that any reduction in access to federal money could prove devastating. On the other hand, I have zero sympathy. The higher ed lobby made its bed — now it’s time to sleep in it. Live by the subsidy, die by the subsidy.

In the meantime, a new study raises important issues about college persistence and graduation rates. In a National Bureau of Economic Research paper, “Gains and Gaps: Changing Inequality in U.S. College Entry and Completion,” Martha J. Bailey and Susan M. Dynarski find that the gap in the rate at which upper- and lower-income Americans entered college increased significantly between 1979-82 and 1997-2000 and also the rate at which they graduated. What’s particularly interesting about the findings is that almost the entire increase in the college gap can be attributed to the outstanding performance of female students in the top income quartile.

Write the authors:

Sex differences in educational attainment, which were small or nonexistent thirty years ago, are now substantial, with women outpacing men in every income group. The female advantage in educational attainment is largest in the top quartile of the income distribution. These findings present a formidable challenge to standard explanations for rising inequality in educational attainment. Girls and boys are raised in the same families, attend the same elementary and secondary schools, and face the same college prices.

Also:

Differences in high school completion between children from low-income families and those from high-income families explain half of the gap in college entry. However, among those who enter college, children from low-income families are much less likely to get a degree. Inequality in college persistence, therefore, produces inequality in college completion, even if college-entry rates were equal (which they are not).

Bottom line: There are ill-understood cultural forces at work affecting the rate at which Americans enter and complete college. College financing programs that blindly shovel out money “so anyone who wants to go to college can” aren’t doing a lot of them any favors. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are borrowing vast sums in the expectation of completing their degrees and earning more in the job market, but end up dropping out. Thus, they get the debt but not the credential. Insofar as poor kids and minorities are less likely to graduate, they are more likely to be saddled with a financial burden that will dog them decades.

Obama has finally awakened to the impact of his easy-credit policies on the price of tuitions. Perhaps one day he’ll understand the impact on the poor and minorities.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

9 responses to “Obama Sees the Light (Well, He Sees Part of It)”

  1. Perhaps if Obama “sees” the effect of “free money” on education, he’ll also see it in other areas of government? One can hope…..

    But he’s certainly not alone.. all those folks who preceded him with “free money” for housing loans sure loused things up big time.

    I’d personally like to see college loans contingent on courses that lead to jobs in demand in the economy. If someone wants to pursue their “dream” but there is no demand for that work in the workplace.. fine.. but do it on your own dime.

    the problem is low income achievement, I agree, is culture and I don’t want to agree with Newt but when he says that there is no culture of “work” – he’s on to something as the people who succeed the best are the ones that know you can never work too hard at something and the ones that fail often believe that they’ve already worked too hard and need to rest.

    That’s where you need a parent telling you that your lazy butt better get in gear or prepare to meet they maker – convinces some to re-think the “rest”.

    I know teachers …. who say.. the best thing that could happen to some kids – is time away from their parents – a boarding school with a taskmaster for a headmaster because mom and dad are worthless in terms of work ethic.

  2. Kudos for pointing the education bubble out ahead of the curve, so to speak.

    Larry is wrong about nontechnical degees. There is plenty of opportunity for people with creativity outside of engineering.

  3. and I think that is fine – I just don’t think they should receive taxpayer assistance.

    taxpayer assistance is for things that have a high likelihood of a return on investment. that should be the criteria for receiving assistance IMHO.

  4. In an ideal world -you’d have NO subsidized loans for anyone. Do your thing and pay for doing your thing.

    the basic idea behind any subsidy is that it will return something of value to the folks who are providing the subsidy. otherwise, it’s called charity.

    the difference between charity and subsidy is that charity is usually voluntary and subsidy is a govt policy, in theory, supported by a majority of taxpayers.

    What we’re finding out is that not only do all taxpayers not agree but subsidies have gotten way out of hand and are now perceived as ‘entitlements”.

    “entitlements” are a big issue right now and anything that walks, talks, smells like an entitlement is under intense scrutiny because more and more people think “entitlements” are perceived by many as “free money” who don’t seem to care that that money is taken from other people … albeit for “good intentions”.

    We are in the process of rethinking the whole issue.

    Some want to get rid of school loans all together. Just say no because they start out on a slippy slope and they never get better..just worse.

    I favor Obama’s approach. Let’s make it clear that these things are not free and that those that receive them have direct responsibilities to those who provide them.

    In that regard – taking money from taxpayers for someone to pursue their own way forward whether it is going to return anything to those who pay or not – is not going to be acceptable any longer.

    We have way too many people who see others get “free money” and want theirs also… This is a recipe for failure of a nation.

  5. DJRippert Avatar

    Jim Bacon is right on this one. Despite the bleating of some GOP’ers suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome, our president does have some legitimate views and good ideas. I am glad to hear him start pointing his finger at the rising cost of college tuition.

    However, public universities are managed by the states, not the federal government. Obama’s threats, while well placed, beg an important question – where is our state government in this matter? As usual, the sad answer is that the political class in Richmond is asleep at the wheel.

    The governance system in the Commonwealth of Virginia is very badly broken. From a one term governor to an elected Attorney General to no recall process, no citizen referendum process and an appointed judiciary – the General Assembly has far too much power. This obvious problem is exacerbated by the very part time nature of the General Assembly and the acceptance of unlimited campaign contributions. The net effect is 140 puppets controlled by special interests without the checks and balances of a multi-term governor or an empowered citizenry.

    The political elite in Richmond run the Commonwealth for their amusement and personal gain.

    Nowhere is that more clear than in the case of public higher education in Virginia. The General Assembly exercises virtually no control over higher education and accepts virtually no responsibility for higher education. Instead, the management of Virginia’s public colleges and universities is left to the various boards of visitors which are comprised of members of the political elite. The positions are filled in return for political favors bestowed upon our General Assembly and Richmond elite.

    The net result of Virginia’s massively broken governance system is a series of capable public universities which fail to keep pace with the state’s growing population and have tuition costs which are spiraling out of control. Honest political commentators like Jim Bacon are reduced to cheering about a few sentences in the president’s state of the union speech. While Jim’s “rah rah” commentary reflects an admirable understanding of the disease one must ask whether he really understands the symptoms and root cause of the malady.

    As usual in Virginia, the root cause of these maladies is a broken governance process build by and for the state’s elite in Richmond.

  6. Don, What do you think is the best governance system for higher ed in Virginia? I presume that you do *not* think the answer is more centralized control from Richmond. Certainly, it’s not practical to turn over the governance of colleges and universities to local governments. Should we privatize? I’m not being argumentative here. I’m genuinely wondering.

    (As an aside, any thought of how to reform higher ed governance in Virginia should be informed by the fact that Virginia institutions, for all their flaws, tend to deliver more educational value for the dollar than other state’s systems of higher education.)

  7. Virginia could have adopted the Obama method… before Obama did…you know…. The Republicans at the State and National level could have advocated for that approach – before Obama did.

    Virginia could do something about health care like Utah and Mass have rather than attacking ObamaCare and complaining about MedicAid.

    Virginia could have shut down liars loans and no doc loans no matter what Fannie/Freddie did….

    but most of all.. a Rippert says – us Virginians … despite being infested with Tea Pot types who have not even uttered one word about it – don’t have the ability to recall idiots from Richmond much less put our own referenda up to a vote to override Richmond on some of their special-interest-ridden laws.

    We have in Va – a ruling elite… forget what Newt is blathering about.. we have our own problems in Va.

  8. Kudos to Obama on this one. I’ve felt like this for years. DJR is also correct in complaining about the political elites on boards of visitors, etc. Too many seem to be there to grow their egos instead of pushing colleges to serve the public interest. Public entities cannot be allowed to increase costs and prices at rates that exceed growth in income.

  9. DJRippert Avatar

    Jim:

    I see no alternative to more centralized state control of Virginia’s public colleges and universities. Barring a complete redrawing of Virginia’s locality map into less that 10 regions the state must step in. The current process of nobody managing the effort is worse than the alternative of Richmond providing the management. Perhaps if our state legislature could drop their fascination with micro-managing local matters they would have time to attend to state-wide issues.

    Value for the dollar is a very narrow perspective. To cite an extreme argument, a state could admit one student a year for a $100 annual tuition, provide a great education and claim the best value for the dollar in the nation.

    I would argue for a much broader measure. Specifically, what percentage of qualified students are being admitted to the appropriate level of college education in Virginia vs other states. In addition, what is the trend in Virginia? Then, it would be appropriate to look at the value for the dollar.

    My quick and dirty look at the University of Virginia over the last 30 years has shown that UVA increased the number of undergraduate slots by approximately one half the population growth rate in the Commonwealth. That does not represent value to the people of Virginia regardless of the rate of tuition inflation. I have been told that Virginia law requires no more than 35% of all admissions to UVA be from out-of-state. One would think that would mean 65% of admissions would be from Virginia. I am told that is wrong because international students do not count as out-of-state. In recent years the University of Virginia has been rumored to be recruiting aggressively in China with one recent entering freshman class reported to include 300 Chinese students.

    A thorough review of Virginia’s public colleges and universities is warranted. This review should include not only a retrospective regarding those institutions but a 10 to 20 year plan for their future. The plan should include increasing access to all of Virginia’s public colleges and universities, containing the tuition spiral at those institutions and an approach for using those colleges and universities as the basis for increased economic development in the Commonwealth.

    Will such a report ever be written (even as Bob McDonnell clamors for more and more college degrees)? I doubt it. Our General Assembly is asleep at the wheel and the Boards of Visitors are busy trying to increase the endowments at cocktail parties while talking about BCS rankings and the upcoming March Madness.

    The public colleges and universities are property of the state. The state is run by an all-powerful General Assembly. It is time for that General Assembly to get of its collective ass and act. Barring that, responsibility for higher education should be taken from the General Assembly. Many counties have elected school boards which are independent from the elected boards of supervisors. Perhaps we need the same structure at the state level.

Leave a Reply