Gone are the days of quiet and calm in Washington, D.C. Tariffs are taking up a lot of oxygen in the room, along with immigration and the economy generally. For higher education, all of those issues are relevant to and impact our students and institutions, as does Congress’s work on budget reconciliation, which is equally consequential but unfolding below the national headlines. While Capitol Hill newspapers are covering this issue more closely, their focus is on changes to the Medicaid program (the federal program that provides low-cost health care to low-income families and children). Students and the institutions of higher education that serve them should be bracing for change, as Congress considers cuts to the federal student loan programs that could limit the resources available for postsecondary study, including graduate education.
Congress has now agreed on a budget resolution that will unlock a reconciliation process. Reconciliation, according to the House Committee on the Budget, “starts with the congressional budget resolution. If the budget calls for reconciliation, it tells certain committees to change spending, revenues, deficits, or the debt limit by specific amounts. Each committee writes a bill to achieve its target, and if more than one committee is told to act, the Budget Committee puts the bills together into one big bill. That bill has special status in the Senate. Like the budget, it cannot be filibustered and only needs a simple majority to pass.”
Thus, this process is unique in Congress—and powerful. The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee and the House Education Workforce Committee, under the direction of Congressional leadership, have a specific amount of savings they will have to achieve from mandatory spending programs within their jurisdiction. The U.S Treasury defines mandatory spending as “direct spending mandated by existing laws.” Put another way, a federal law defines program eligibility criteria, and those who meet the criteria receive those dollars or benefits. Examples are social security and federal student loan programs.
The regular process for reviewing federal education policies is called reauthorization, and it is the responsibility of those same Committees. When tackling a reauthorization, these Committees, about every five years, are expected to hold hearings; review federal higher education law; and propose changes to improve those programs. It is an important process that allows Senators and Representatives to look holistically at how these federal higher education programs work together and consider whether they serve students, institutions and our national interests. The Higher Education Act of 1965 has not been reauthorized by these Committees since 2008, nearly 20 years. Think about what has changed in 20 years, and how a comprehensive review of programs and policies might be important. Because reauthorization is not granted special rules like in reconciliation, it is difficult to achieve consensus to pass a reauthorization bill. Perhaps, then, that is one reason that Congress has not chosen this pathway for making needed programmatic change. Instead, we will witness a piecemeal approach with the savings generated from cuts and changes to these programs repurposed for tax extenders, border security and other Trump Administration priorities.
It is decision time, and just this week, the House Education Workforce Committee released their legislation. Their proposal restructures the student loan programs and repayment options, eliminating lending options for students. It also imposes a new risk share model that has a negative impact on Jesuit colleges and universities (along with other nonprofit institutions), siphoning funds from institutions with the better outcomes and directing funds to institutions with low graduation rates. While there are some positives to their proposal, overall, it will limit access and choice in postsecondary study.
AJCU is tracking budget reconciliation closely because it matters to students at Jesuit colleges and universities. Federal student loans generally have favorable terms (like fixed interest rates, no credit check and options for repayment) and make graduate study more accessible to students with financial need. The Education Workforce legislation eliminates some borrowing options for students pursuing graduate degrees. The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee will write their own language, and we expect to see similar proposals advanced from them.
Congressional advocates of these proposals have two goals. One goal is to save money from the federal government and provide those savings to extend tax cuts put in place by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Acts of 2017. The second goal is to limit graduate borrowing, which they argue is out of control.
Making decisions about these issues—borrowing that protects students and considers program cost while supporting proper training, strong preparation for licensure and career, and good stewardship of the federal dollar—are complicated and should be considered with deep deliberation that comes with reauthorization. While Congress and institutions should have substantive discussions about student loan debt, adopting these changes in reconciliation and taking billions of dollars from the education portfolio is short-sighted.
We learned a lot about mental health in this issue of Connections. Mental health providers are one example of many where states require graduate degrees to obtain a license for practice or advancement. Psychologists, social workers, doctors, some nursing professionals, some teachers, engineers and occupational therapists are other careers that require graduate training—and where our nation faces shortages.
AJCU will continue to advocate for opportunity and access. Central to Jesuit education are knowledge and learning, coupled with the why…to serve others, especially those at the margins, in hopes of making the world better. Many of these professions, where states require advance degrees for licensure, are true helping professions. These are not jobs that can be or should be replaced by AI—they require human, relational engagement, and we believe that Jesuit colleges and universities can well prepare our graduates in these fields, where they will serve with their heads and their hearts.
By Jenny Smulson, Vice President of Government Relations, AJCU