SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
The Real Scandal of Student Loans
The emerging scandal over college financial aid administrators that have cozy relationships with companies that lend students money to attend is only the tip of a much bigger scandalous iceberg.
Take a close look at the whole system of federally-subsidized college loans and you'll see a system designed to give banks and private lenders a fat taxpayer subsidy they don't deserve.
The Federal government subsidizes college loans in two different ways, giving colleges and universities the option of which way to go.
Apr 13, 2007
The emerging scandal over college financial aid administrators that have cozy relationships with companies that lend students money to attend is only the tip of a much bigger scandalous iceberg.
Take a close look at the whole system of federally-subsidized college loans and you'll see a system designed to give banks and private lenders a fat taxpayer subsidy they don't deserve.
The Federal government subsidizes college loans in two different ways, giving colleges and universities the option of which way to go.
The first way is for the federal government to lend students the money directly. Students get a good deal because the government, being the government, can raise funds at a lower interest rate than can banks or other private lenders. The government then lends those funds out to students at a rate lower than students could get if they got an ordinary loan.
The alternative is for the federal government to subsidize student loans indirectly by guaranteeing banks and other private lenders that if a student doesn't repay the loan, the government will. The government also gives banks and private lenders additional subsidies to ensure they get a profitable return on any student loan they make.
Obviously, this second alternative is a great deal for the banks and other lenders. They get a guaranteed return on a no-risk loan. But it's a lousy deal for American taxpayers. According to a study by the Center for American Progress, taxpayers pay about $7 more for every $100 lent by the private lenders than they do on direct government loans.
That amounts to billions of taxpayer dollars each year. Billions that could be saved if the direct loan program was the only program. Billions of savings that could be put, for example, into Pell Grants for needy students.
So here's the multi-billion-dollar question. Why does the federal government continue to provide colleges and universities the option of going with the more expensive program when the government can offer direct loans more cheaply? Why is it that some fifteen years after the direct student loan program was first established, more than three-quarters of student loans still come through the more expensive system?
Let me hazard a guess. Because the banks and other private lenders have enormous political clout in Washington. They also have clout within colleges and universities.
This is the real scandal of student loans, and it's got to stop. There's no good reason for the federal government to waste taxpayer money by subsidizing banks and other private lenders when government direct loans are cheaper.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Robert Reich
Robert Reich is professor emeritus of public policy at Berkeley and former US secretary of labor. His latest book is the No. 1 New York Times best-seller, "Coming Up Short."
The emerging scandal over college financial aid administrators that have cozy relationships with companies that lend students money to attend is only the tip of a much bigger scandalous iceberg.
Take a close look at the whole system of federally-subsidized college loans and you'll see a system designed to give banks and private lenders a fat taxpayer subsidy they don't deserve.
The Federal government subsidizes college loans in two different ways, giving colleges and universities the option of which way to go.
The first way is for the federal government to lend students the money directly. Students get a good deal because the government, being the government, can raise funds at a lower interest rate than can banks or other private lenders. The government then lends those funds out to students at a rate lower than students could get if they got an ordinary loan.
The alternative is for the federal government to subsidize student loans indirectly by guaranteeing banks and other private lenders that if a student doesn't repay the loan, the government will. The government also gives banks and private lenders additional subsidies to ensure they get a profitable return on any student loan they make.
Obviously, this second alternative is a great deal for the banks and other lenders. They get a guaranteed return on a no-risk loan. But it's a lousy deal for American taxpayers. According to a study by the Center for American Progress, taxpayers pay about $7 more for every $100 lent by the private lenders than they do on direct government loans.
That amounts to billions of taxpayer dollars each year. Billions that could be saved if the direct loan program was the only program. Billions of savings that could be put, for example, into Pell Grants for needy students.
So here's the multi-billion-dollar question. Why does the federal government continue to provide colleges and universities the option of going with the more expensive program when the government can offer direct loans more cheaply? Why is it that some fifteen years after the direct student loan program was first established, more than three-quarters of student loans still come through the more expensive system?
Let me hazard a guess. Because the banks and other private lenders have enormous political clout in Washington. They also have clout within colleges and universities.
This is the real scandal of student loans, and it's got to stop. There's no good reason for the federal government to waste taxpayer money by subsidizing banks and other private lenders when government direct loans are cheaper.
Robert Reich
Robert Reich is professor emeritus of public policy at Berkeley and former US secretary of labor. His latest book is the No. 1 New York Times best-seller, "Coming Up Short."
The emerging scandal over college financial aid administrators that have cozy relationships with companies that lend students money to attend is only the tip of a much bigger scandalous iceberg.
Take a close look at the whole system of federally-subsidized college loans and you'll see a system designed to give banks and private lenders a fat taxpayer subsidy they don't deserve.
The Federal government subsidizes college loans in two different ways, giving colleges and universities the option of which way to go.
The first way is for the federal government to lend students the money directly. Students get a good deal because the government, being the government, can raise funds at a lower interest rate than can banks or other private lenders. The government then lends those funds out to students at a rate lower than students could get if they got an ordinary loan.
The alternative is for the federal government to subsidize student loans indirectly by guaranteeing banks and other private lenders that if a student doesn't repay the loan, the government will. The government also gives banks and private lenders additional subsidies to ensure they get a profitable return on any student loan they make.
Obviously, this second alternative is a great deal for the banks and other lenders. They get a guaranteed return on a no-risk loan. But it's a lousy deal for American taxpayers. According to a study by the Center for American Progress, taxpayers pay about $7 more for every $100 lent by the private lenders than they do on direct government loans.
That amounts to billions of taxpayer dollars each year. Billions that could be saved if the direct loan program was the only program. Billions of savings that could be put, for example, into Pell Grants for needy students.
So here's the multi-billion-dollar question. Why does the federal government continue to provide colleges and universities the option of going with the more expensive program when the government can offer direct loans more cheaply? Why is it that some fifteen years after the direct student loan program was first established, more than three-quarters of student loans still come through the more expensive system?
Let me hazard a guess. Because the banks and other private lenders have enormous political clout in Washington. They also have clout within colleges and universities.
This is the real scandal of student loans, and it's got to stop. There's no good reason for the federal government to waste taxpayer money by subsidizing banks and other private lenders when government direct loans are cheaper.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.