USSA

This afternoon at lunch Campus Progress is hosting a great panel discussion in Washington DC where they will discuss the state of our system of higher education and the burdening costs that young people are shouldered with when they graduate.

According to the release

"On the heels of student protests in California against 32% tuition hikes, college affordability is making headlines again, and the timing could not be more critical as landmark college affordability reform legislation awaits action in the Senate. This Wednesday, Campus Progress, the United States Student Association and USPIRG will host a panel discussion examining the implications of the controversy in California, and looking ahead at efforts to make college more affordable and accessible on the institutional, state, and federal levels. The panel will feature: Congressman Tim Bishop, Bruce Cain from the UC System, Victor Sanchez from the UC Student Assoc, Angus Johnston of studentactivism.net, Pedro de la Torre III from Campus Progress, and moderated by Erica Williams from CP."

Tuesday, Demos and the United States Student Association released findings about students and private loans

"Yet with tuition skyrocketing and entry-level jobs flat-lining, students are borrowing more and more against their futures to pay for school. A startling 67 percent of the U.S. bachelor’s degree graduates last year had student debt, averaging about $23,200 per indebted student. While most of that debt is in safe, lower-interest federal loans, a significant amount is in private loans that can carry interest rates of over 18 percent.

"In fact, due to aggressive marketing, nearly 3 million American students took out private loans last year, up from less than 1 million just four years before. Since federal loans are lower interest and have more borrower protections, taking out unnecessary private loans for college is like putting tuition on a high-interest credit card that students can’t pay off for years. And like credit cards, private loans carry costly penalties and fees and are marketed heavily to students regardless of need, resulting in unnecessary and damaging levels of expensive debt. Unfortunately, unlike with credit cards, there has been no “Credit Card Holder’s Bill of Rights” for student loans to reign in the worst abuses in the private loan market."

The briefing paper recommends the Consumer Federal Protection Agency actually regulate private loan companies and ensure protections for youth who have to navigate paperwork etc.. They also call for a close to the loophole in the House CFPA bill that could allow some colleges (the ones that are more focused on profit) to "make private loans to students without abiding by the CFPA’s consumer protections."

I reported a few weeks ago about the extent to which students who attend these schools often graduate with the most harmful of loans and graduate without the necessary skills to take part in their career path of choice.

The briefing paper references some main abuses in the private loan market and the connection they have to the "for profit" school industry.

• "Unnecessary Loans: Any student with access to the full information should only buy a more expensive private loan after reaching the maximum federal loan amount first. However, full information is increasingly the exception, and not the rule. Last year, almost 2 out of every 3 private loan borrowers did not reach the Stafford limit before taking out a costlier private loan; 26 percent took out no Stafford loans at all.
• Outrageous Rates: Unlike federal loans, most private loans have no upper limit on their interest rates. As a result, private student lenders charge annual percentage rates (APR) as high as 18 percent—nearly three times the average federal loan APR and twice as high as the federal cap on student loans.
• Rate Floors, Not Ceilings: During the recession, the federal government has lowered interest rates to make money cheaper for lenders—but the savings have not flowed through to millions of private loan borrowers. That’s because instead of ceilings, many private loans have rate “floors” guaranteeing that the borrower’s interest rate stays high. The resulting spread that lenders are pocketing is as high as 12.5 percent.
• High Fees: There are no legal limits on the fees private lenders can charge students. Eighty-five percent of lenders charge origination fees just to make the loan, averaging 4.5 percent of the loan amount—but with some as high as 9.9 percent.
• In-School Interest: With federally-subsidized loans, the government pays the interest while the student is in school and not making payments. Private lenders start running the clock from the moment of origination. The difference is significance; a college freshmen who takes out a private loan for $1,500 at the start of the year will owe $2,945 on that loan alone the day he or she graduates.
• Aggressive Marketing at For-Profit Schools: While only 9 percent of undergraduates attend for-profit schools, these students make up 27 percent of private loan borrowers."

The most interesting turn of events is that the progressive community isn't the only one that has noticed this. The Family Research Council (The Christian organization promoting the traditional family unit and the Judeo-Christian value system upon which it is built) has announced that they are having a lecture with Tony Perkins where he will discuss the "Crushing Burden Of Student Loans On Family Formation For Generation X+." Apparently because young people (both Gen X and Gen Y) are so overburdened with student loans and financial responsibilities they are having a rough time starting families to make more little Family Research Council people, the Family Research Council has decided to discuss the importance of taking action now.

Its nice that solving the student loan crisis is an issue that every part of the political spectrum can get behind.

The United States Student Association has released an important and thoughtful statement from president Gregory Cendana about the impact Senator Kennedy had on young people and students across the country.

"Senator Edward Kennedy was steadfast advocate for college students his entire career. The federal aid, access and retention programs, and anti-discrimination policies he championed for four decades has allowed millions of students to achieve a higher education. Specifically, his work in creating the Pell Grant enables millions of low-income students to go to college every year.

The United States Student Association and students across the country will look to the late senator for inspiration and wisdom in the continued pursuit to make education a right. Opening the college doors for those who cannot afford to pay the skyrocketing cost of a higher education is a noble way to remember Senator Kennedy.

While he will be sorely missed, Senator Kennedy will survive through the community organizing and political courage of those who carry the torch in making this a more just and compassionate world."

Responses to Catherine Rampell's Op-Ed in the Washington Post, which trashed youth orgs - particularly Rock the Vote - were published in today's edition of the paper. My own LTE didn't run, but three others did - one from Rock the Vote, one from the Student PIRGs, and one from USSA:

Galvanizing Young Voters

Saturday, April 5, 2008; A13

Catherine Rampell's March 30 op-ed column, "Why Obama Rocks the Vote," falsely framed recent surges in turnout of young adults -- voters ages 18 to 29 -- and failed to recognize the important work done by nonpartisan organizations such as Rock the Vote.

Turnout of these young voters in fall elections increased by 4.3 million in 2004 and by another 2 million in 2006. Far from being an anomaly, 2008 is set to become the third major election in a row with an increase in turnout among young voters.

While Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is doing excellent work engaging young adults this year, our research shows that registration is a major step toward participation. In 2004, 82 percent of registered young adults voted, up from 74 percent in 2000. In 2004, Rock the Vote registered nearly 1 million voters, and already in 2008, more than 500,000 young adults have used our online tool to register to vote. Like the Obama campaign, Rock the Vote's message embraces the hopeful spirit of the millennial generation, and our tested and proven strategies of peer-to-peer mobilization reflect youth culture.

We're seeing unprecedented engagement in the primaries and caucuses so far and are confident we'll see this continue through November.

-- Heather Smith

Washington

The writer is executive director of Rock the Vote.

·

Catherine Rampell's analysis of trends in youth voting was misleading. Youth voter turnout was on the rise long before the 2008 elections. In 2004 alone, turnout among those ages 18 to 24 rose at a rate nearly three times that of the general population.

Rampell also ignored a vast body of research that points to the efficacy of canvasses, phone banks and other on-the-ground grass-roots methods. It's likely that this research, combined with the increase in turnout, persuaded most of the candidates to pay more attention to young people this primary season, turbocharging the youth vote even more.

By ignoring this correlation, Rampell missed a chance to explain the exciting continued increase in young voter turnout.

-- Sujatha Jahagirdar

Los Angeles

-- Carmen Berkley

Washington

Sujatha Jahagirdar is program director for Student Public Interest Research Groups' New Voter Project, and Carmen Berkley is vice president of the U.S. Student Association.

Since the hold is now off, here's what I submitted to them for publication. I think I exceeded the word limit . . . :

In her recent Op-Ed on the youth vote (Why Obama Rocks the Vote, March 30), Catherine Rampell trafficked in some of the worst stereotypes about young voters and conveniently skipped over significant events in the last 5 years that thoroughly disprove the bulk of her argument.

Ms Rampell is right to note that Sen. Obama is playing a crucial role in increasing youth turnout this election cycle, but rising youth turnout is not a new phenomenon. It began in 2004 when young voters created dozens of new organizations – partisan and non-partisan – to target their peers. In 2004, voter turnout among 18 – 29 year olds rose 9%. In 2006, this trend continued and the youth vote rose for the first time during a midterm election sine the 1980s.

Before Senator Obama was ever on the ballot, organizations like The League of Young Voters, the Young Voter Alliance, Music for America and many more were driving young people to the polls in greater numbers. Senator Obama, whose youth operation is staffed with veterans of 2004 and 2006, is building on the successes of these groups.

Ms. Rampell’s piece neglected to mention any of this, preferring instead to repeat stereotypes about young voters and youth organizing that may have held true in the 1990s, during the reign of Generation X, but bear little resemblance to the realities of youth organizing today. In this, she is not alone. The revolution in youth politics I describe has gone largely unnoticed in the media.

As Senator Obama might say, it’s time the media abandoned the (youth) politics of the past and embrace the change that has occurred right under their noses.

Michael Connery
Author – Youth to Power: How Today’s Young Voters Are Building Tomorrow’s Progressive Majority

John Edwards and Barack Obama released their education plans this week. Both are proposing solid first steps to reduce the burden that rising tuition places on students and eliminate some of the most egregious abuses of the government/corporate lending system.

The plans are both good (and I'll post a head to head review of both plans later this week) but I'd like to see the candidates take it a step further.

As Jonathan Singer and Peter Levine have both noted, Obama and Edwards are taking a somewhat original approach to organizing their campaigns. In addition to asking for traditional campaign support - volunteer hours, donations, and local organizing - these campaigns are asking their supporters to take action on specific policy issues. John Edwards has been doing this for months - indeed, his entire campaign is designed around the idea that he and his supporters need to be the change they want to see. That's the whole idea behind OneCorps, Edwards' dual community service/campaign organization. So far, OneCorps has asked members to support the troops by stopping the war and reduce their carbon footprint, among other actions. Barack Obama's campaign seems to be following suit. He recently asked his supporters to contact their Senators and Congressmen to end the war. In short, these candidates are organizing their followers to impact policy before they are elected to higher office as a way of campaigning to attain that office.

Nobody's hit a home run with this type of organizing yet, but so far I like it. Seeing a candidate engage in direct action before attaining higher office can help defuse the initial skepticism of politicians and politics that many voters - particularly younger voters - feel. These action campaigns show voters that the candidates are about more than words. This isn't "trust what I say, not what I do." Rather than force voters to take it on faith that a candidate will live up to his/her rhetoric once they are in office, these campaigns are showing now how they would act on some of the major issues of the day for young voters.

That's why, following on the release of their education plans, I'd like to see these - and all - candidates organize students to take action on two major policy proposals new before Congress: the Student Loan Sunshine Act and the renewal of the Higher Education Act (pdf).

Here's what I think that would look like:

Jennifer S. Pae is the president of the United States Student Association, the country’s oldest and largest national student association representing millions of students across the country in the Capitol, the White House, and the Department of Education. Jennifer recently ended her term as the primary student negotiator for the student loan committee for the Department of Education.

Right now, a corrupt college official and student loan lender may be purchasing a round of mojitos with your student loan check. Unfortunately, we have come to learn through Attorney General Cuomo’s recent investigations that this is not as absurd as it may sound.

Deceitful student loan practices have festered for years without federal oversight. Now that widespread corruption has been revealed, college students and their families must increase the pressure on Congress and the U.S. Department of Education to restore integrity to the nation’s higher education system.

Recently, Education Secretary Spellings testified before the House Education Committee and, once again, students are left behind in the debate over regulation and enforcement of the growing problems within the student loan industry. Chairman Miller grilled Secretary Spellings on the lack of enforcement by the Department with the student loan industry for unethical behaviors. While the Secretary explained that the “hurdle is too high” for enforcement due to unclear regulations and claimed that she was already taking large strides in oversight.