News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
April 13, 2007
With the scandal over conflicts of interest in student loans continuing to grow, Education Secretary Margaret Spellings is pledging tougher enforcement of ethics rules, as the Education Department released more information about sale of stock in a lender by an official who works on student loan issues.
And in a sign of just how volatile the loan industry is today (and how lucrative it remains), reports emerged Friday morning that Sallie Mae, the industry giant, is in talks to be bought out by private equity in a deal for more than $20 billion, according to The New York Times.
A statement released by the department late Thursday said that Spellings has asked Susan Winchell, the department’s chief ethics officer, to review “best practices” on its own financial disclosure forms to identify ways that the department might improve. Spellings also has directed that each financial disclosure form now be reviewed by at least two lawyers.
Last week, Spellings placed on leave Matteo Fontana, an Education Department official who works on student loan issues, after the New America Foundation reported that he had sold at least $100,000 in stock in the Education Lending Group, which owned Student Loan Xpress, a lender at the center of the current controversy.
It is unclear whether that sale (or the prior ownership) violated any laws or regulations, but the news about Fontana prompted calls from Democrats for tougher enforcement of loan rules by the department.
Financial disclosure reports for Fontana released by the department late Thursday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by Inside Higher Ed offered conflicting evidence on the extent of his stock ownership and sale and of his disclosures to the department about those assets.
In his initial filing in mid-December 2002, soon after joining the department, he reported owning between $1,001 and $15,000 in stock in Direct III Marketing, as Student Loan Xpress was known at the time, and an equivalent amount of stock in Education Lending, Inc., then the parent company of Student Loan Xpress. (A note written on the form by the ethics officer at the time said “Filer [was] advised to contact Ethics Division if ELG stock exceeds $15K.") In May 2004, his first full financial disclosure, covering the 2003 calendar year, he reported having sold between $1,001 and $15,000 in stock in both companies later in mid- to late December 2002. That could be read to suggest that he had sold all of his stock in both companies.
But in May 2005, according to his disclosure form for the 2004 calendar year, Fontana reported having sold between $100,001 and $250,000 in stock in Education Lending common stock in July 2004. There is no explanation of where that stock came from. The fact that Fontana reported the sale is likely to add to Democratic Congressional criticism about the Education Department, as Fontana’s reporting raises the question of whether anyone at the department took action based on the apparent conflict.
Late Thursday, Sen. Edward Kennedy, chairman of the Senate committee with oversight of education programs, issued a statement saying: “The financial disclosure forms filed by Education Department official Matteo Fontana during his time at the department raise grave concerns about the effectiveness and impartiality of the ethics process at the department. The forms show that department officials were aware that Mr. Fontana held a significant financial interest in a company that he was charged with overseeing. Any American can tell you that this is dead wrong.”
The statement from the department Thursday noted that “like many federal government employees, Department of Education employees may own stock in any company, including companies the Department regulates or with whom the Department does business.” The statement went on to elaborate: “The conflict of interest statute prohibits employees from working on department matters that will affect the companies they own stock in unless the employee receives a waiver or an applicable regulatory exemption. For example, employees are generally permitted to work on any matter even if they do own stock as long as their interest in the matter does not exceed $15,000.”
The department also announced that Spellings has asked for the resignation of Ellen Frishberg from the department’s Negotiated Rulemaking Committee on Student Loans. Frishberg, director of student financial services at Johns Hopkins University, was placed on administrative leave by the university after it learned that she had received payments from Student Loan Xpress.
Frishberg is the second person Spellings has asked to leave a student aid post because of the scandal. Spellings earlier sought the resignation of Lawrence W. Burt from the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. Burt is director of financial aid at the University of Texas at Austin, although he too is on leave, following reports that he owned Student Loan Xpress stock.
The investigation of lender-college relationships has been led by Andrew M. Cuomo, attorney general of New York State, but it has prompted considerable interest among Congressional leaders as well. And there are no signs that the inquiries are winding down.
Reuters reported Thursday that the attorneys general of Connecticut and California are also starting probes of the topic, joining a previously announced review by the attorney general of Minnesota.
To date, most of the individuals implicated in the scandal — at least those working at colleges — have been financial aid officers. But on Thursday, a president joined the list of those being scrutinized.
Elnora Daniel, the president of Chicago State University, is a director and shareholder of a lender to which her university steers students, The Chicago Tribune reported. A Chicago State trustee is also chairman of the board of the lender, Seaway National Bank. Daniel told the Tribune that there was “no quid pro quo” in her relationship with the lender. Chicago’s other daily, The Sun-Times, reported, meanwhile, that Western Illinois University was abandoning an arrangement in which it received payment — called kickbacks by critics — from a lender it was recommending to students.
And Bloomberg reported Friday on a number of college officials — including the president of Morehouse College and the executive vice president of the University of Notre Dame — who collected pay or stocks from lenders at the time those lenders were being recommended to their students.
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
Not only is $2 million a slap on the wrist, what is that money actually buying? ‘Education’ on the financial aid process? We’ve had enough of this already, thank you. Nobody in this business has been spared the nonstop promotional barrage aimed at every microniche of aid professionals, undergrads, graduate students, HS seniors, even middle schoolers. The material that purports to encourage responsible borrowing sneaks the Trojan Horse of loans in every time.
Slightly more amusing is the revelation that private equity is in talks to buy up Sallie. Recent SLMA stock downturns will accelerate on the recent bad news, making it an even tastier target. If I wanted to buy SLMA with the millions I’ve salted away from working in financial aid, I’d shovel out as much bad news as I could, to cheapen the stock before the ink was dry.
finaidfollies, at 8:16 am EDT on April 13, 2007
If Cuomo had all these “evildoers” dead to rights, he would not be offering settlement options. It would look much better on his resume to actually prosecute and convict. It is the convict part that is not certain and he knows it despite his bluster. I’ll say it again...a few smelly fish are the exception out of the thousands of lender and financial aid folks working to help students every day. Let’s not let the tail wag the dog.
Bob, at 9:43 am EDT on April 13, 2007
I have an idea—why doesn’t the government just forgive all loans taken out by all the students involved via demanding the financial giants repay the educational loans of the students affected? Or, is that too much to ask of the $20 billion dollar industry. Otherwise, where does the “fine money” these fiancial aid companies pay actually go? Will it help those afflicted by the unethical actions? Or, will it go to some unknown government pot to pay for Christmas decorations on the White House Christmas tree? (Okay, that last statement went too far, but gee whiz, enough is enough!)
Linda K, at 9:43 am EDT on April 13, 2007
Think about it. Students only want to complain when its time to pay back a loan they borrowed. When students recive their financial aid the funds are used to pay off their balance owed to their school. Any excess funds are given back to the student to use for other educational purposes. But everyone knows students use their money to go on a shopping spree, buy a new car or to buy things they want not need. Students have no problem in spending the money but they don’t want to take the responsibility of paying it back. Now imagine how many honest employees these lenders, servicers and schools employ. Now imagine how this will affect their jobs, their future and their familys they support. With the gas prices rising who could afford to be unemployed? So, why should the lenders or government forgive the student loans that students took out to use for their education and their unnecessary spending. Every student should learn how to read everything they sign. Its not the lenders or governments fault that the student didn’t read their MPN prior to signing it or research the lender before selecting one. Maybe this is a lesson learned or may be its not.
Anela, at 12:20 pm EDT on April 13, 2007
First of all, Sallie Mae reported net income of $1.1 billion in 2006, meaning the above analogy would be a bill of $181 to a person that earned $100,000 in a year. Still an insignificant amount, but bad analysis drives me crazy.
Second, this corruption is an example of what happens when price controls are implemented in a way that creates such a lucrative industry. If people really want to “look after the best interest of students” all those kick-backs flowing to financial aid officers would flow directly to students in the form of lower interest rates or maybe up-front cash back. Make those lenders compete for the right to lend me guaranteed money in a way that benefits the consumer.
Brent, at 6:46 pm EDT on April 18, 2007
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
The Department of Radiation Oncology in the School of Medicine at UNC-Chapel Hill invites applications for a tenure-track ... see job
Founded in 1898, and affiliated with what is now New York-Presbyterian Hospital since 1927, Weill Cornell Medical College ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
The History Department of the University of Massachusetts Amherst invites applications for a tenure-track assistant professor ... see job
FIT Where Creativity Gets Down to Business see job
Position Summary: The Department of Molecular Biology at Princeton University currently has research ... see job
The African American Studies Program and the English Department at Wesleyan University seek a specialist in African American ... see job
The University of Kentucky is one great place to work. UK’s agenda—simple—to accelerate the movement toward academic ... see job
Sinclair is a comprehensive community college with an enrollment of over 24,000 students that offers career and transfer ... see job
Suffolk County Community College, New York State’s largest community college, is seeking an experienced, qualified ... see job
Slap on the Wrist
The recent fines imposed By AG Cuomo against Citibank and Sallie Mae are laughable.
While a $2M fine sounds large the recent announcement that Sallie Mae is worth at least $20B is no more than a slap on the wrist. To better illustrate, let’s do a little math. $2M divided by $20B would be written as.0005. To give this some perspective, this fine is the equivalent of a person earning $100,000 being fined $50.00. To a lender this fine is not more than a few dozen pens, a stack of sticky pads and a couple of coffee mugs.
What a shame that Mr. Cuomo didn’t impose fines that could be considered a disincentive. Any lender would be happy to pay the fine and move on without admitting any wrongdoing. The sad part is that like Ken Lay and the executives involved in the Enron debacle, the executives in the loan industry will insist that they did nothing wrong and will point to the carefully worded statements and spin that these settlements offer. The reality is that there was a lack of ethics and unacceptable business practices uncovered by this investigation.
If it was discovered that a financial advisor was suggesting investments to a client in which the advisor was provided stock options, vacations and consulting fees in return for placing the investments on a short list of investments he would be out of business, blackballed from the industry and serving jail time.
Jack Girvan, Founder at Educational Funding Consultants, at 7:35 am EDT on April 13, 2007