Bill Statistics
The Middle Class Position
How They Voted
Grades
The House receives a grade of B for its support of the middle class on this piece of legislation.
354 Representatives voted for the middle-class position; 58 voted against.
See how each member voted on this bill:
College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008
11.09.2007 [House]
Rep. George Miller [D-CA]
The College Opportunity and Affordability Act amends the Higher Education Act, seeking to minimize tuition and cost increases at institutions of higher education. The legislation encourages states to maintain funding for public colleges by threatening to withdraw federal higher education funds from states that reduce financing. Additional efforts to keep tuition costs down include a public reporting system for tuition and fees and the establishment of Quality Efficiency Task Forces to oversee and advise institutions that consistently increase prices. The bill requires publishers of textbooks to provide pricing information to colleges and professors when they are making purchasing decisions and compels educational institutions to offer such information to students before class selection. The bundling of separate textbook materials is prohibited.
The Act also prohibits deceptive lending practices and seeks to eliminate conflicts of interest that have often arisen between institutions of higher education and lenders. The bill bans co-branding, a marketing practice in which a college’s name or mascot is used by an educational lender; bars financial aid officers from accepting gifts from and sitting on the advisory boards of lenders; and requires lenders to disclose more information about loans to student borrowers. Prepayment and repayment fees are prohibited. The legislation allows up to $10,000 in loan forgiveness for individuals working in areas of “national need”, such as early childhood educators, nurses, foreign language specialists, teachers working in low-income communities, public safety officers, and health care practitioners. The Act increases the maximum Federal Pell Grant, a need-based grant awarded primarily to undergraduates, from $5,800 to $9,000 and expands the program to accommodate year-round study, certificate programs, and part-time students. Funding for graduate student programs at Historically Black Colleges and Universities, at Hispanic Serving Institutions, and at other minority serving schools is expanded and the TRIO and GEAR UP programs, which assists first-generation and at-risk students to progress towards degree achievement, are strengthened. Finally, the bill streamlines the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form and creates a new form for low-income students and families; requires the Secretary of Education to publish a list of accredited degree-granting institutions in order to impede the activities of diploma mills; authorizes grants to encourage colleges to adopt environmentally sustainable practices; and encourages institutions to curtail peer-to-peer file sharing.
Middle Class Supports. Although a college education is increasingly a prerequisite for a middle-class standard of living, aspiring middle-class and middle-class students are struggling more than ever to afford college. Indeed, in recent years the maximum Pell Grant, designed to provide financially strapped students with an opportunity to attend college, has failed to keep pace with rising higher education costs. 2007’s College Cost Reduction and Access Act, which increased the maximum Pell Grant and limited federal subsidies to student lenders in order to increase college financial aid by $20 billion, was a necessary first step in making college more affordable. The College Opportunity and Affordability Act’s additional increase of the maximum Pell grant will make college accessible to more aspiring middle-class Americans. Additionally, the expansion of the Pell Grant program to include year-round education supports the hardest-working students struggling to complete their educations quickly. Continued commitment to the TRIO and GEAR UP programs is critical to ensuring that first generation and at-risk students are able to obtain a college education and achieve a middle-class standard of living.
Furthermore, skyrocketing tuition costs and large and confusing debt obligations can make college impractical and financial stability after college difficult. Indeed, the College Board reports that average tuition and fees at four-year public institutions have increased 51% over the last five years and that private undergraduate loans have grown from 3% to 12% of the funds used to finance postsecondary education since the 1996-1997 school year . The College Opportunity and Affordability Act improves a private student loan system that has been characterized by favoritism and murky lending practices. The Act will not only put an end to the most egregious conflicts of interest, but will expand and simplify the information that is available to students and their families when deciding what loans are best. Ending such practices will ensure that students receive the most affordable loans, not loans that are the favorites of an unethical financial aid officer. A simplified application form for federal student aid will ensure that students are not dissuaded from seeking financial assistance for higher education because of complex paperwork. Publication of the tuitions of institutions that fail to rein in tuition hikes and the threatened reduction of federal aid if tuition increases are not contained are effective means to influence institutions of higher education to make college more affordable. Efforts to reduce the cost of textbooks will also be helpful to students struggling with high costs.
“Last year, Congress provided the first meaningful increase in financial aid funding for students and their families in over five years. However, low and middle income students still face significant unmet need in attaining a college degree. Even with new mandatory funding for the Pell Grant which brings the proposed maximum award to $4,800, this maximum award covers 50% less of tuition, room and board costs than it did thirty years ago. Congress should build on last year’s investment to restore and further increase critical grant aid programs for students from low and moderate income levels.”
- Christine Lindstrom, Higher Education Project Director, U.S. PIRG (February 4, 2008)
“The growth of private student loans is a cause for concern. These loans are dangerous. They’re aggressively marketed by lenders and are largely unregulated by the federal government. Unlike federal loans, they have high, variable interest rates and few protections for borrowers. College officials should be doing all they can to help students avoid this potentially ruinous type of debt. Federal policymakers should also use their authority to protect borrowers from the most misleading and punitive private-loan practices.”
- Robert Shireman, Executive Director, Project on Student Debt (September 22, 2007)
Middle-class students and their parents should not have to sacrifice future financial stability for the benefits of a college education. Though the College Opportunity and Affordability Act does much to reform the relationship between students and educational lenders, the bill fails to allow borrowers to discharge student loans during bankruptcy. Without this provision, borrowers already facing financial decline must continue to repay student loans, while other types of consumer debt, such as credit card debt, are discharged. Investment in education, perhaps the most important investment an individual can make, should be encouraged and protected, not penalized. Additionally, future legislation should revoke current law’s ban on financial aid for students who are convicted of non-violent drug offenses. Sufficient punishment for drug crimes already exists within the criminal justice system. Students with drug convictions should be encouraged to continue school, where they will not only learn important skills but also have access to important support services. Finally, while increased oversight of public university systems that raise college tuition rates excessively may have beneficial effects, the Congress must also recognize that the federal government’s own fiscal policies have drained state budgets, encouraging states to reduce their support for public higher education. More federal support for public universities would address this concern directly.