Advertisement

News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education

Lenders Speak Out Against Cuts

A coalition of bankers and other parties in the student loan industry wrote Republican Congressional leaders Wednesday to “strenuously oppose” proposed cuts to the federal student loan programs, which they said “threaten our ability to fulfill the critical national need of providing affordable access to postsecondary education.”

The letter adds: “Cuts this deep will hurt borrowers and lenders alike. Lenders will be forced to curtail borrower benefits, will have trouble maintaining high-level service, and will have more difficulty financing student lending.”

Congress has been working for months on legislation, part of the “budget reconciliation” process, to squeeze savings from mandatory federal programs to reduce the budget deficit, offset the cost of tax cuts, and, as of this fall, raise money to help rebuild the Gulf Coast from hurricane damage.

Both the Senate and the House of Representatives began with the goal (as set out in the budget blueprint Congress passed in February) of producing $35 billion in savings from mandatory programs, and both chambers tried to wring between a quarter and a third of that money from the government’s two student loan programs. They have proposed doing that through a mix of cuts in subsidies to lenders and increases in interest rates and other costs to students and families, though exactly which group is paying more has been a subject of intense debate and dueling reports.

This fall, House leaders upped the ante, raising the target for their overall budget savings to $50 billion and ratcheting up to $14.3 billion the amount they sought to squeeze from the loan programs. The House passed legislation (HR 4241) to make those cuts this month by one vote.

Groups that represent students and colleges and universities have lobbied loud and hard against the proposed cuts (with the slogan “Stop the Raid on Student Aid"), arguing (1) that the federal government should not do anything to increase costs to students at a time of rising tuitions and (2) that any savings produced from the student loan programs should be used to bolster access to higher education, not pay for tax cuts or hurricane relief.

The banks, guarantee agencies and other financial institutions that participate in and profit from the guaranteed student loan program have appeared to remain largely silent throughout the process, even though Republican leaders have insisted that lenders (rather than students) are bearing the brunt of the cuts.

Why would the lenders be so compliant if their ox is being so badly gored? The conventional wisdom is that they knew some cuts were likely no matter what, and that Rep. John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), who heads the House Education and the Workforce Committee and is a friend to the lenders, had urged them not to lobby against the first layer of cuts approved as part of legislation to extend the Higher Education Act (which would have cut about $9 billion from the loan programs) by vowing to protect them from worse ones.

But when House Republicans decided to raise their budget target to $50 billion and slice another $5 billion or so from the loan programs, some lenders began pushing industry leaders to speak out against the cuts. They quietly sent one letter to all House Republicans in mid-October, and another to the same group in early November. But still, the impression was that the lenders were staying on the sidelines.

The letter released Wednesday “was prompted by concern that cuts are excessive in the House and Senate bills, and that if lenders do not speak up, then the mistaken impression could be left that these cuts are OK” with us, said John Dean, president of the Consumer Bankers Association, which co-signed the letter.

The letter — which was also sent by the Education Finance Council, National Council of Higher Education Loan Programs, Nelnet, Sallie Mae, and the Student Loan Servicing Alliance — echoes the themes of the earlier ones. Although it vaguely repeats threats that changes that make student loans less profitable could drive lenders from the guaranteed loan program, the letter mostly focuses on the extent to which disinvestment in student aid will hurt higher education and American competitiveness.

“We understand that the federal budget deficit must be reduced,” the groups wrote. “However, our country’s future depends on an educated workforce, which in turn must be able to finance higher education. Cutting federal support for student loans, the most efficient way to finance higher education for the federal taxpayer, would reduce our ability to compete in the global marketplace.”

The letter urges lawmakers to keep cuts to the loan programs “to an absolute minimum.”

What that might mean in practical terms is unclear. With the Senate having passed a bill that would cut $35 billion (but direct nearly $8 billion in savings from loan programs to create two new financial aid programs for needy students and those who specialize in math and science), and the House having narrowly passed a bill that would cut $50 billion and shift all savings from the loan programs to deficit reduction and other purposes, lawmakers trying to draft a compromise between the two versions have their hands full.

Doug Lederman

Got something to say?


Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Advertisement

Comments

federal student loans

I agree with the banking coalition that large cuts in federal student loans will jeopardize the academic career of many students. College Board reported that the average tuition at a four year private college is $21, 235 and the average for a four year public college is $5,491. Unless your last name is Rockefeller, you will need student loans to pay for your education.

R Markham, at 9:52 am EST on December 2, 2005

Student loan programs

The proposed “cuts” in aid will affect the lenders more than the student population. In fact, students may be permitted to borrow more in the future than they now can under this plan.

Something must be done to control the cost of higher education before our colleges face the same financial crisis as exists in the healthcare sector. The inflation rate in higher education is far higher than the rest of the economy and that cannot continue without hurting poor people the most.

I would make one significant change to the Republican proposal though. I would greatly limit the amount of compensation allowed for the CEO’s of the lending community. I believe the CEO of Sallie Mae “earned” over $47 million dollars last year. Salaries of that magnitude are a heavy burden to place on the backs of our students, and serve only to exacerbate the problem of financing higher education.

Feudi Pandola, at 1:07 pm EST on December 2, 2005

Cuts WILL Affect Students

Although the proposed cuts in lender yields will most likely have an effect in borrower benefits, another proposal is to reduce origination fees lenders pay to the DOE from 3% to 15 or even 0%. This possibility—some would say probability—has resulted at least in part to a number of lenders proactively waiving origination fees on all student loans. As only between 7%-15% (depending on the study) of borrowers actually receive a back-end benefit, it could be argued that students will be better off with a guaranteed zero-fee loan than with the promise of money-saving benefits in repayment that never materialize. There are, however, costly changes being proposed for the consolidation program that could cost students thousands of dollars extra through the course of repayment. It is true that we should be spending additional funds to increase access and affordabilty rather than subsidizing repayment for students who have already completed their education. Nevertheless, it is discouraging that Bush’s foreign crusades and poorly timed tax cuts are resulting in significant cuts to higher education.

Anonymous, at 5:21 am EST on December 4, 2005

Government must find a new way to pay national debt

Some people say college students don’t pay much attention to what goes on in US congress but I am here as a 22 year old college student, to tell you we do. We pay a lot of attention and many of us are more than a little angry with the state of the government and what it means for our generation. The fact that we still have to pay into social security and there ill be none left for us when it is time for us retire is maddening to say the least. Now in addition to this, congress is trying to cripple us with doubling student loan interest rates.

As a soon to be college graduate (December 2006) I am stuck between a rock and a hard place with student loan rates set to rise on July 1 2006. If I don’t consolidate now, the interest rate on my loans will double (I really can’t afford that as I will be 50,00 in debt before interest after graduation) or if I consolidate my loans I will lock in my interest rate but I will loose my six month grace period and have to start paying right away (how am I supoosed to pay for that- I probably won’t have a job THAT soon after graduation).

I think the solution is to cut the salaries of people like Sallie Mai , whose income exceded $47,000,000 last year. Her income alone would pay for my college education at a private school more than 958 times.

I ask what has Generation Y every done to the government to make them slam on us like this? Truly, these are problems created by the generations of my parents and grandparents why should my generation have to pay for that? It used to be that the average WORKING adult(no one should get any kind of “free lunch” especially those who are unemployed) could retire around the age of 62. For my generation this probably will not be the case. We will probably have to work well into our 70s if stress does not kill us sooner. That is not fair.

Kerry, Ms., at 5:25 am EDT on June 21, 2006

Advertisement

 Jobs Related to Lenders Speak Out Against Cuts

or search for jobs directly.

Student Life Specialist Search
Colorado College

Founded in 1874, Colorado College is a private, four-year, independent coeducational liberal arts college of 1950 ... see job

Assistant Professor (Non-Tenure-Eligible) — Corporate Communication
Ithaca College

Job Description: Ithaca College’s Roy H. Park School of Communications Department of Strategic Communication ... see job

Assistant, Associate or Full Professor
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Junior Scientist
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Tenure Track Full-Time Faculty Opening — Zoologist
California University of Pennsylvania

Located on the Appalachian Plateau, an area of rolling hills, California University of Pennsylvania is a short drive from ... see job

FCSM-2242 Assistant Professor, Plant Biologist
Towson University

Applications are invited for a tenure-track appointment in the Department of Biological Sciences at Towson University ... see job

Human Resources Coordinator/HRIS
Hofstra University

Hofstra University seeks a Human Resources Coordinator to provide Human Resource Information Systems (HRIS) and ... see job

Assistant Professor-International Relations
James Madison University

Join one of the finest regional universities in the nation. James Madison University, home to 18,000 + students, welcomes you ... see job

Professors of Engineering
Alfred University

Alfred University’s, New York State College of Ceramics, The Inamori School of Engineering invites applications for four ... see job

Executive Director, System Facilities Operations
Lone Star College System

Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job