Lamar Alexander, head of the Senate’s education committee: “It is unfair and untrue to suggest that for most students college is out of reach financially.”Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images
The Senate has held four hearings since the middle of January to discuss revamping the federal law governing higher education. But as momentum ramps up, signs of discord on fundamental issues may throw a wrench into the plan to reauthorize the law — which is overdue for an update — this year.
The Senate’s education committee convened on Tuesday to discuss affordability in higher education. The problem was clear: The cost of higher education is rising, and students are having trouble repaying their debt. But there was less consensus on a solution.
“While it is never easy to pay for college, it is easier than many think, and it is unfair and untrue to suggest that for most students college is out of reach financially,” Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, chair of the committee, said. He proposed the “Bennett hypothesis,” which is the idea that increasing federal student aid fuels rising college costs.
Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.
Don’t have an account? Sign up now.
A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.
Lamar Alexander, head of the Senate’s education committee: “It is unfair and untrue to suggest that for most students college is out of reach financially.”Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images
The Senate has held four hearings since the middle of January to discuss revamping the federal law governing higher education. But as momentum ramps up, signs of discord on fundamental issues may throw a wrench into the plan to reauthorize the law — which is overdue for an update — this year.
The Senate’s education committee convened on Tuesday to discuss affordability in higher education. The problem was clear: The cost of higher education is rising, and students are having trouble repaying their debt. But there was less consensus on a solution.
“While it is never easy to pay for college, it is easier than many think, and it is unfair and untrue to suggest that for most students college is out of reach financially,” Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, chair of the committee, said. He proposed the “Bennett hypothesis,” which is the idea that increasing federal student aid fuels rising college costs.
The National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators sent a letter to committee leaders on Monday calling the staying power of the hypothesis in policy discussions “harmful” and “irresponsible.”
“On its surface, the idea that federal, state, or other public subsidies would lead to higher, inflated prices resonates,” wrote Justin Draeger, the association’s president. “But the higher-education funding landscape is far too complex to attribute price increases to any single factor or source of funding.”
Senator Alexander, however, said that Congress should at least consider its effect. Further, he said that the question of greater federal investments in student aid is a question for another committee, but that a revised Higher Education Act should, in the meantime, simplify student aid and redirect money to Pell Grants to help low-income students.
Meanwhile, Democrats on the committee called for more federal dollars for student aid. “The way we finance higher education by asking everyone to take on debt is sending a clear message that college is for the wealthy — not the students who have the most to gain,” said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the top Democrat on the committee. “We can, and must, work to keep college within reach for all students.” Senator Murray was among those calling for greater direct investments.
Several experts have argued that disagreements on affordability and accountability, among other issues, signal that there is a long way to go before any legislation passes, despite verbal agreement from committee leaders to get a deal done.
The House education committee passed its version of a reauthorization — the Prosper Act — in December, along party lines. But on the Senate side, a final bill would need 60 votes, requiring some level of bipartisan support.
ADVERTISEMENT
“The likelihood of it passing before 2020, I would put at very minimal,” said Barmak Nassirian, director of federal relations and policy analysis at the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. “I’d put it as close to zero as I would any likelihood.”
But that’s not only because of political disagreements about gatekeeping, costs, and quality, Nassirian said. “We have a bigger and more foundational problem,” he said. The lack of a consensus — even on an academic level — on a theoretical framework for revamping higher education, or pieces of it, sow deeper discord than political posturing, he said. He pointed to calls for simplifying the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, the Fafsa. There is broad agreement that it needs to be fixed, but far less accord on how it should be fixed.
Adam Harris, a staff writer at The Atlantic, was previously a reporter at The Chronicle of Higher Education and covered federal education policy and historically Black colleges and universities. He also worked at ProPublica.
