Thomas Botzman: Free college proposals benefit students who don't need assist

Washington Post education reporter Danielle Douglas-Gabriel recently wrote an interesting article about the “no lose proposition” of free college among politicians stumping across the country. In doing so, she highlights several aspects of this concept that may have escaped notice. I will add to her list with a few others.

The seasoned reporter asks, for example, how many years of college should federal and/or state governments pick up the tab for? Some states, such as New Jersey and Maryland, have plans that cover the cost of community colleges. Others, such as New York, provide grants to students at public four-year universities.

On the community college side, the current Pell Grant and other federal aid cover much, if not all, of the cost at these two-year institutions. The “last dollar in” approach taken by many states reduces the cost to the state. However, in reality it provides more funding to the wealthier student and less to the student with financial challenges. The result is that in several states, such as Louisiana, about half of the aid goes to families with income greater than $100,000, according to the report.

Clearly, this does help the middle class, but it certainly is not a program aimed at those with the least ability to pay for college. In this scenario, students who struggle to pay for food or housing have few options remaining after federal financial aid.

At four-year colleges and universities, many students borrow as undergraduates as a gateway to graduate studies. In fact, according to a collaborative study by The Urban Institute’s Sandy Baum and Higher Ed Insight’s Patricia Steele, 34% of federal student loans go to graduate students, even though they comprise only 17% of all college students, thereby accounting for about one-third of all college loans. Overall, graduate students borrow on average $18,210 compared to $5,460 for undergraduates.

So, who ends up with the large student debt noted in media reports? Fifty-six percent of graduate students from law school, for example, have more than $100,000 of debt, while 64% of graduates with a professional degree in health care, such as medicine or dentistry, also reach six figures in debt. Providing “free tuition” to wealthy students, in effect, will cut their graduate debt while leaving less wealthy students out of these prestigious professional careers.

The U.S. Federal Reserve reports that students average about $32,000 in loans, with the median about $17,000. The difference between the mean and median indicates that a smaller number of students, such as the graduate students above, skew the data by taking on substantially more debt.

We can, and all should be, supportive of students attaining a college degree without incurring excessive debt. In my view, the current federal and state programs, such as the Pell Grant and the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency grant (PHEAA), direct funds toward students with the greatest need. As the federal government looks to reauthorize the Higher Education Act, which guides student financial aid, legislators should continue and enhance funding to the existing financial aid programs.

Support students with need rather than providing free college to the rich.

Thomas Botzman, Ph.D., is president of Misericordia University in Dallas, Luzerne County.