Cornell political scientist argues that Congress is to blame for crushing America’s higher-ed dream

higher-education-AmericanIn perhaps one of the most eloquent discussions on the problems facing higher education today, Suzanne Mettler, professor of American Institutions at the Department of Government at Cornell, argued that the polarization of Congress is quickly killing the American Dream-and why.

Mettler, author of the book, Degrees of Inequality: How the Politics of Higher Education Sabotaged the American Dream, lead a discussion on how the demise of the promise of higher education is, fundamentally, a political failure.

“I was fascinated from my previous book about the G.I. Bill and its influence on providing access to college for typically below median income people and wanted to know why that access hasn’t changed since the 1970s,” said Mettler.

According to the Mettler, only 1 in 10 low-income students earns a bachelor’s degree by age 24, compared to 3 in 4 for wealthier students.

What’s also shocking, noted Mettler, is the fact that the gains in low-income students obtaining degrees from four-year colleges are unimpressive: not only have over 10 countries surpassed the U.S. in providing traditional college education to all students, but today’s below median income groups are still no more likely to get a four-year degree than they were in the 1970s—a startling fact made even more striking because now, more than 30 years ago, it’s critical for students to have a postsecondary degree to compete in the economy.

“Government, since the inception of higher education, has always been involved,” explained Mettler. “The difference from then to now is in what I like to call the ‘Policy Scape,’ and Congress’ inability to maintain it.”

Mettler’s explanation goes like this: There are ‘landmark’ policies in higher education that have been around for decades. But just like any policy, higher-ed policy requires maintenance in the form of monitoring, evaluation, amendment, and assessment of design and administration.

Up until the late 1980s and early 1990s, Congress was adept at maintaining the higher-ed policy landscape…but not anymore.

(Next page: The reason why Congress isn’t doing its job)

“Partisan politics is to blame,” said Mettler, “it’s what I like to call polarization—a term we political scientists don’t throw around lightly. The extent to which both parties overlap are becoming less and less and part of this is a decline in moderates.”

Polarization is problematic, said Mettler, because it usually causes stalemates, halting amendments, especially when it comes to student financial aid and the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA).

It also causes what Mettler said is Plutocracy.

“Some interests can rise above the fray in a polarized Congress,” she explained. “The problem is that these interests most often come from powerful vested interests, like industry, rather than a group of exploited students.”

Plutocracy is happening, she said, with for-profit colleges today. For-profits, notorious for reaching out to low-income students with limited time availability, often charge much more than traditional public colleges and universities, forcing students to borrow money to pay for the higher tuition.

“The average student leaves a for-profit with $33K in loan debt,” said Mettler. “That perhaps could be manageable if these students were paying off these debts, but they’re not. “

Mettler related how for-profits account for 13 percent of all colleges and universities in the U.S., and one in four use federal student aid dollars made available in the HEA.

“This is a problem because 47 percent of all student loan defaults come from for-profits,” she said. “They have incredibly poor outcomes, yet are allowed to receive 97 percent of HEA’s Title IV, not counting what they get from the G.I. Bill, et cetera.”

Other problems caused by the polarization of Congress, said Mettler, include:

  • Poor state decisions: 73 percent of students attend public state institutions. While these institutions used to be a high point of entry for low-income students, that’s not the case today thanks to the rise in tuition cost, caused by states. States, on average, spend 26 percent less per student than 20 years ago, and tuition has increased by 113 percent in the same amount of time.
  • A broken tax system: Tax dollars are used to support college students, and those dollars are lost revenue to the federal government. Yet, as the statistics prove, these dollars are not increasing access to those students who need it most.

“The U.S.’ identity is at stake,” emphasized Mettler. “We need to step back and think about the purpose of higher education and if the government should have a role in it. Today we only talk about higher education as a private good that helps some individuals be better off, but it should serve the broader public.”

(Next page: The benefits to expanding access; steps from here)

Expanding access to a broader demographic is not only critical for higher-ed institutions to boost graduation rates, but can also: increase the possibility for innovations to bolster the economy, mitigate social inequalities, and re-invigorate democracy.

“Re-invigorating democracy means getting more people, from all groups, involved in American civics. The G.I. Bill proves that those who have access to higher education become more civics-minded,” said Mettler.

Calls to action

Mettler recommends re-evaluating or changing policy management in Congress, starting with for-profits.

“It really is Plutocracy and not plain constituency influence because polarization makes influence easier for interest groups; instead of having to lobby every member of Congress, they can go to leadership to sway the group,” she noted. “Up until the 1980s, when there was little-to-no polarization, both parties regulated for-profits.”

Next, states must be regulated, she said, as states currently have a “perverse incentive” to not invest in higher education.

“States have competing mandatory demands on funding, like Medicaid and K-12 education, and higher-ed is discretionary. Many states are not spending money on higher-ed in order to get more student aid dollars. We need to require states to have more maintenance of funds and monitor their efforts.”

Non-profits, private and public institutions must also be held accountable for their spending, tuition, and appropriation of funds.

For more information and dialogue on this intriguing theory, check out Mettler and peers at the New American Foundation’s webinar, “Degrees of Inequality.”

Sign up for our newsletter

Newsletter: Innovations in K12 Education
By submitting your information, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Oops! We could not locate your form.

Sign up for our newsletter

Newsletter: Innovations in K12 Education
By submitting your information, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.