Sunday, June 10, 2007

Better Late Than Never

In a piece last month, headlined “Greed in Higher Education,” I commented on the practice of kickbacks from student loan lenders to colleges and/or their financial aid officers.
I concluded by noting the U.S. Department of Education was supposed to regulate, but apparently hadn’t.
Guess what?
The department has released proposed rules for lenders and universities.
They take up 225 pages and provide “a change in direction,” according to the New York Times.
The department’s own inspector general has been calling for these changes for years, but was ignored. This is just another example of how election of a Democratic Congress, with investigative powers, is forcing reforms within the Bush administration.
Among the proposed rules:
• Universities would have to have at least three lenders on their list of recommendations to students.
• The schools would have to explain why they were making the recommendations.
• Most gifts and payments to financial aid officers would be banned.
These proposals would apply only to federally-guaranteed loans, a sizable portion of the $85-billion industry. Yes, billion.
The chief operating officer of the office of Federal Student Aid, Theresa S. Shaw, has stepped down (read pushed out).
But I’m sure she was following the policies of Education Secretary Margaret Spellings, and of the administration, that believes the loan industry should be left unregulated.
Spellings should follow in the footsteps of Shaw.

5 Comments:

At June 15, 2007 at 1:15 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Five days and no responses. Maybe there would be more comments if the subjects were of interest to people, instead of just a platform to bash politicians, which always turn out to be republicans. How many people really care about college loans, Cape May’s planning board or the World Bank anyway? These topics are not blog-worthy.

 
At June 16, 2007 at 11:39 AM , Blogger Joe Zelnik said...

That's a very interesting comment, except that I have hardly bashed Republicans at all. I will try for more varied subjects than the previous ones: Anna Nicole Smith, Katie Couric, "soft" Americans, beach replenishment, gas prices, Easter egg hunts, porches, the death penalty, shore critics, and prosecuting alleged terrorists.

 
At June 16, 2007 at 6:29 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hardly at all? Define "hardly." The next time you take a shot at Jeff Vandrew will be the first time.

 
At June 17, 2007 at 9:30 AM , Blogger Joe Zelnik said...

My column of May 23 questioned his sponsorship of the New Jersey Catastrophe Fund. But admitedly that was not in my blog.
Thanks for your interest.

 
At June 17, 2007 at 8:16 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seems to me that education, the cornerstone of our democracy, is neither a Republican (Capital "R", by the way, to the last respondent)or Democratic issue. We ALL need to care about the fair and just administration of college loans, as only through an educated electorate can we sustain our precious freedoms. As for subjects that are "of interest to people," we'd all better do a better job of engaging ourselves in the dealings of college loans, the planning board and, especially, the World Bank, among other things. If these topics are not "blog-worthy" in a democracy, then I don't know what is.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

free hit counter script