Wednesday, April 17, 1996
Proposals could mean $100 million less for U.S. students, $9
million drop in California By Lia Ramsey
Daily Bruin Contributor
As the House and Senate meet at the budget table once again this
week in Washington, part of their debate will concern the amount of
money earmarked for financial aid in higher education.
Despite the pleas of student activists, the Republican-dominated
Congress seems certain to cut some funds from financial aid.
However, the debate over how much has become fierce in recent
weeks.
In the meantime, university officials are waiting and hoping
that their federal-aid programs to students will not be eliminated
altogether.
"There are so many different plans. We’re sort of in a holding
pattern right now," said Gwen Neal, associate director of financial
aid here at UCLA.
Current proposals before the House and Senate joint conference
committee could potentially eliminate up to $100 million in
student-aid programs that go to both undergraduate and graduate
students. Out of this figure, California stands to lose about $9
million in student-aid funds, according to Hellan Dowden, a
spokeswoman for the California Senate Education Committee.
Though Republicans have been the most vociferous advocates for
these cuts, GOP officials maintained that they were not waging an
all-out war on education and student aid, as critics have
suggested.
"There’s been a lot of misinformation about what Republicans
want to do to students. Republicans are pretty strongly committed
to student loans," said Chris Burk of the Economic Education
Opportunities Committee in Washington.
While decisions and proposals are being tossed around in
Washington, UCLA is continuing its financial aid programs for
students at 1995 levels. But Ronald Johnson, UCLA’s director of
financial aid, said that if Congress decides to make large cuts,
aid would not be able to continue at present levels.
"This means that the amount of money given to students for
financial aid could be way below where it should be this next year,
which is of great, great concern," Johnson said.
And indeed, some UCLA students are beginning to worry.
"I need the money because my family is low income and I didn’t
get a lot of scholarships  I need the financial aid," said
first-year student Hugh Tsai.
Tsai receives his financial aid from government-funded programs
that operate through the UCLA campus. These programs may be
eliminated under proposals pending now in Congress.
Because the House and Senate were unable to reach any agreement
before their two-week Easter recess, which just ended on Monday,
they passed an interim continuing resolution that will keep the
government in operation and financial aid flowing to students,
through April 24. Continuing resolutions were used before to
restart the federal government after its forced shutdown during
last winter’s budget debate.
This latest resolution leaves the House and Senate with only two
weeks to come up with an agreement that could severely impact the
financial aid programs of schools like UCLA.
The federal aid programs to students that are specifically under
attack include the Perkins Loans Program, the State Student
Incentive Grant Program and Harris Graduate Fellowships. Perkins
Loans are revolving on-campus loan funds that receive capital
contributions from the federal government; State Student Incentive
Grants are normally matched by individual states and go
significantly to graduate students, and Harris Graduate Fellowships
give aid to needy graduate students as well.
Though each house’s plan targets student aid, the Senate plan is
more lenient than its House counterpart. The Senate plan for
financial aid would maintain almost all current spending levels,
eliminating only the Harris Graduate Fellowships.
"The Senate package is the higher of the two and will provide
more funding for higher education," Johnson explained.
However, one version the House is considering cuts $3.3 billion
from education programs, eliminates State Student Incentive Grants,
Perkins Loans, Harris Graduate Fellowships, and places a 40 percent
cap on the popular direct loan program.
Direct loans provide aid as borrowed money that goes straight
from the government to students, without going through the
university first. Direct loans are not available at all
universities, including UCLA. Burk explained that Republicans
favored a cap on this program because it is unestablished and
expensive.
"We have a philosophical problem with direct lending," Burk
said. "First of all, it’s relatively untested … and the direct
student loan program costs more than other student-loan
programs."
The debate surrounding this cap has become a major flashpoint
for the disagreement between Republicans and the Clinton
administration.
But there are also other ways that new allocations of the budget
could affect government aid to students.
"The government wants to give an additional $10 million to
private universities which means a 27 percent increase to private
students," Dowden said.
By giving this money to private schools, the federal government
would  in effect  be taking it away from public schools
like the University of California’s nine-campus system, Dowden
explained.
However, Tsai is not complaining about money going to private
institutions more than public schools as long as students who need
help can get it.
"It depends on the students  the students who need more
money should be able to get it. And, private institutions do cost
more than public institutions."
Students who have legally and illegally immigrated to the United
States could also be affected by new laws concerning financial aid
that would make it harder for them to qualify for student
loans.
The House has already passed a bill that requires immigrants to
have a U.S. citizen co-sign for a student loan. The Senate’s
version of this bill is harsher and requires immigrants to include
the financial assets of the sponsor when they apply for aid. The
Senate’s bill goes to the floor this week and may be decided as
early as April 18.
At least one legislator expressed concern about where the money
would go after being cut from education.
Sen. Leroy Greene, chair of the Senate Education Committee, said
that, in California, the trend has been to put money into state
prisons. For 1996-97, prisons will exceed higher education as a
percentage of the state budget.
"I have a concern that higher education should be a focal point
of our society as opposed to the prison system," Johnson said.
But despite the predictions, some participants in the budget
debate are confident about funding for financial aid and
education.
An official in the office of Republican Sen. James Jeffords, the
subcommittee chair of education, arts, and humanities with the
Labor and Human Resources Department in Washington, said that
things could be much worst.
"With the budget cutting frenzy in Washington, it’s pretty fair
to say the Department of Education has done pretty well," said Erik
Smullsen, Jefford’s press secretary. "They could be almost
maintaining levels of aid at the ’95 level."
For UCLA financial aid information:
http://www.saonet.ucla.edu/fa.htm