Obama seeks changes to keep PELL grants at $5,500/yr rather than cut to $2500

[uppityperson]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110213/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_pell_grants

President Barack Obama's budget plan would cut $100 billion from Pell Grants and other higher education programs over a decade through belt-tightening and use the savings to keep the maximum college financial aid award at $5,550, an administration official said.
(clip to get to relevant paragraphs)

The first proposal would end the "year-round Pell" policy that let students collect two grants in a calendar year, with the second grant used for summer school. The official said the costs exceeded expectations and there was little evidence that students earn their degrees any faster.
(clip)

A second proposal would reduce loan subsidies for graduate and professional students. That would free $2 billion next year and save $29 billion over 10 years, according to the official. The government currently pays the interest on student loans for some graduate and professional students as long as they stay in college. But the official said experts think the subsidy has failed to encourage more students to attend graduate school and it isn't well-matched to borrowers who have trouble repaying the loans.

The administration also has expanded other programs that help students reduce loan payments and ultimately forgive debt they can no longer afford to repay....(more including expanding use of IRS to ease application process)

Having a child in school I would be very happy to have the PELL grants remain the same and remain accessible to more students. Without action, officials say, the maximum award would have to be cut by more than $2,500 to meet demand.

[midnight]

1. Why is the IRS being expanded to this application of easing the debt burden?

[uppityperson]

4. From the article, which is good to read....

Another $4 billion in savings over 10 years would be achieved by broadening the use of IRS data to determine eligibility, reducing improper payments and easing the application process, the official said.

[originalpckelly]

18. mispost

[originalpckelly]

2. Um, couldn't they have paid for this shortfall by NOT giving tax cuts to the rich?

$29 billion is sure less than the $900 billion that we just gave away to the rich last year, right? So that means no changes to the program would have to be made, if we'd just let the tax cuts expire, right?

It's like a compulsive gambler spending all their money at the casino, then having to scrape by on the really important things.

[uppityperson]

7. I am glad my child will get $5500 rather than $2500. That is what I am addressing here

I understand the frustrations with the other cuts and non-cuts, with the increasing spending on military and give aways to the rich. However, I am also VERY glad to NOT have PELL grants cut overall. If they can keep it at $5500 by cutting the summer school $500 grants, then more people will be able to attend college.

Now, if we could get them to deal with increasing college costs, that would make me happier.

[originalpckelly]

20. You know what it's called? FUCKING CONTEXT!

We have no reason to be outraged if we just look at this article in isolation. It sounds perfectly reasonable to do this, and if we were really living outside our means as a nation, then it would be fine and dandy and logical to cut the summer grants and keep the fall/winter grants at the same level.

However, if we remember that we just gave away hundreds of billions of dollars to people who simply didn't need it, then we have reason to be outraged.

This bullshit of forgetting what happened yesterday is the way this awful system keeps ticking, because if people had a little longer memory and attention span, they'd see just how badly they're getting fucked.

SO NO, I won't forget.

[uppityperson]

23. I know. I am FUCKING OUTRAGED at a lot but am also VERY GLAD they aren't cutting the PELL grants

in half. Seriously. I am outraged at a lot but this is not one of them. If they WERE cutting the PELL grants in half, I would be outraged. Be outraged at outrageous stuff but this isn't one of them.

[Davis_X_Machina]

8. Get sixty votes in the Senate....

....and you can have tomorrow declared Wednesday.

SATSQ.

[patrice]

13. "We" lost that particular battle, when "we" FAILED to give up tax breaks for the Middle Class. nt

[phleshdef]

17. The shortfalls we may end up having well exceed what the rich tax increase would have made up.

You could apply the "tax cuts for the rich" argument to any single item. But what you are failing to do is take the entire budget picture as a whole. Sure, it could make up for the shortfall in, lets say, pell grant funding. But what about pell grant funding + every other frigging thing that the government subsidizes? The answer is, no, it won't.

[patrice]

25. That's the stinky rotting monster in the "Progressive" arena; you NEVER hear anyone consider whether

we are dealing with a situation here that is profoundly different financially. All of the President's actions are assessed in OBSOLETE financial terms. Everyone on the Right AND "the Left" want to pretend that Bush's Derivative Crash of 2008 is over and done with and now it's more or less business as usual, so let's get back to fighting over a fantasy budget in their heads that isn't even REALLY there.

[bluestate10]

48. The Right is being typically closed minded.

Citizens in states that have the highest concentration of rightwingers look down their noses at blue states that fundamentally pay for government and government services in the rightwing states.
But the President Obama bashing by Liberals and Progressives take me aback somewhat. Every funding shortfall would be taken care of in the Left's and Progressives' minds if tax cuts for the rich had been allowed to expire. What goes unsaid, as you and the previous poster so wisely touched on is that to fund programs that Liberals and Progressives want at the levels of funding that those groups want would not only require that tax breaks for the wealthy be rescinded, but all tax breaks for the middle class rescinded and eliminated and tax breaks for the poor eliminated, AND that taxes on all workers be raised. I am certainly not opposed to raising taxes, that is the price for a peaceful society. But the lopsided view that some take regarding the causes of short funding in important programs does nothing to move the debate forward, in fact, that viewpoint, expressed vociferously by many DUER, in reality stunts the debate and leads to gridlock as sides dig in their heels as over the top after over the top solutions are yelled from the fringes.

[patrice]

50. Agreed! Which also makes it necessary to consider whether Pelosi's move

to perpetuate the Middle Class Tax Breaks was fueled by "the Left" or traitors to the grassroots who knew how that would dis-empower us relative to NEEDED budget cuts, or some combination of "the Left", wait, let's call that "the professional Left" + various double-crossers.

I raised hell about it around here when it happened, didn't win any converts, because I'm just not sufficiently anti-Obama enough for the self-appointed gatekeepers that reside on this board. Be aware that the same can happen to you.

[originalpckelly]

27. Something is not working out right here.

The problem is that there is an improper allocation of resources, on a massive scale, in the economy. And of course, who do think benefits from that the most?

When people are suffering, they are homeless, without food, heatless, without proper education, without jobs, and without proper health care there is something wrong. And it needs to be fixed.

People in our country shouldn't have to work 3 jobs just to stay afloat.

This free market economy is not free, it is a fixed game, if a casino were to put out a capitalism game, they'd be closed up by the regulators, because it's just that unfair.

[phleshdef]

49. The problem is, we have too many of them (problems). It'll take years to get over the Bush economy.

Bush spent 8 years completely ignoring our domestic needs while not giving one damn about the deficit. Barack Obama has probably spent as much or more on domestic needs in the past 2 years than Bush did his entire 8. And now he has to tackle the debt and deficit. When this country elects people who spend all that time ignoring those 2 key areas for several years, this is what it has to deal with when the backlash hits. Instead of dealing with it in small, nearly unnoticable doses, we have to eat all the pain of it in one big chunk.

[bluestate10]

51. Ad nausea.

"People in our country shouldn't have to work 3 jobs just to stay afloat.

This free market economy is not free, it is a fixed game, if a casino were to put out a capitalism game, they'd be closed up by the regulators, because it's just that unfair."

Participation in society has a price attached. A person does not have to work three jobs if the standard of living that person choses to live at does not require three jobs. Having children, a big minivan and a big house are choices, many people living well on one salary chose not to make those choices, hence do not have the financial stress that comes with having made those choices. If one does not like capitalism, there are subcultures that one can chose to live in, as long as other people's rights and freedoms are not violated. If one does not like buying food from big companies, or the so called industrial farms, find and support local farmers with one's patronage. The same dynamic goes with clothing, every town has tailors that are literally dying for business. One enormous problem that I have with many viewpoints that are expressed on DU is that posters take the view that we as individuals are unwilling pawns on a chessboard, when in fact we make free choices everyday that either improve our quality of life or make it worse. There is not now and never has been such a thing as free lunch, everything that is "free" comes with a price, and more important, every choice has consequences.

[patrice]

28. At least with their historical financial environment, Just or not, the Right can actually DO stuff,

while, "the Left", thus far, incapable of actually doing much that amounts to any kind of financial power, just keeps kicking and screaming about how it "ought to be" and WHO, other than themselves, ought to do something REAL about it.

I don't like this state of affairs any more than any of the Obama haters around here, but THESE ARE THE FACTS.

[Aleric]

3. So, in other words

Pell grants will decline in real dollars over the next ten years at the rate of inflation. College costs will continue to rise at greater than the rate of inflation and the democrats will do nothing to solve the real problems in our education system. Typical.

[uppityperson]

5. I'd rather my child get $5500 than $2500. I'd rather it not be cut in half.

But hey, that is just me. This doesn't address homelessness or the rising price of gas either. It is about PELL grants and student loans.

[Aleric]

9. Lowered expectations

We have been so beaten and abused by democratic leadership we are happy with whatever scraps they throw to us.

[uppityperson]

15. Again, I'd rather have $5500 available to more than $2500 available to less.

I don't call that "scraps" but hey, rant on.

[Aleric]

37. Scraps

This is from the University of MN - http://www.academic.umn.edu/accreditation/b_transforming/index.html

"The value of the average Pell grant is half of what it once was for low-income students at a four-year public institution. For fans of students working their way through college, this, too, is an increasingly difficult prospect. A student earning minimum wage today would have to work 60 hours a week to pay for his or her education versus 20 hours per week a quarter century ago."

Right now, A four year degree at the U of MN costs roughly $50K. At a guess, a pell grant which is calculated based on need and overall tutition rate will cover about 25% of that cost. i.e. in order to get that full $5500 you need to go to a more expensive college.

Now, ten years from now if college costs continue to rise at 6.5% as they have been, due to compounding, the cost of a 4 year degree at that same institution will be $94,000 and that pell grant will cover %12 of that cost. Meanwhile, wages will have continued their downward trend in real dollars. So that $50K education which *might* get you $35K in the first year (IF you can get a job at all) will now cost you $94K to get a $45K job in 2021.

In short, college is becoming a bad investment.

So, yes. You can happily accept today's scraps and ignore the damage to the future or you can recognize that the system is broken and work to fix the underlying problem. The current government on both sides prefers to throw scraps and hope you won't notice the damage they are doing.

[uppityperson]

40. I'd rather have more than less.

I'd also rather they start addressing the increasing costs of college. But simply as far as the choice of cut the PELL grants in half or cut out the summer school $500 grant? It doesn't take a genius to figure out which is better.

[Davis_X_Machina]

12. It's just as important, if not more so, to punish the colleges..

...regardless of how individual students might fare, as it was back in the glory days here of "Kill the Bill", to punish the health insurance companies regardless of how individual patients and potential patients might fare.

It's the DU way.

[Horse with no Name]

44. The problem with this kind of thinking

is that you are glad you got what you need--but in order for you to get it, someone else lost it.

"Be careful that victories do not carry the seed of future defeats."
-- Ralph W. Sockman

[uppityperson]

45. No, I lost the summer school grant also.

Edited to add that I was wrong about summer school grants, thought I read they were limited to $500 and after doing more research, I was wrong.


I'd prefer no cuts, no cap, and figuring out how to make the educational costs themselves less, but in this case, I prefer to keep the overall PELL grant higher.

[patrice]

35. All true except for limiting it to "democrats" doing nothing. Neither will any of the other factions

out there because ALL political margins are too thin.

This means that we should demote the political parties and organize around committed accountable concrete WORK on the issues, first, foremost, and always, and, then, political parties only secondarily. And grassroots groups doing this kind of work should be empowered amongst themselves, when someone puts party ahead of issue, to call that person out in terms of the defined CONCRETE issue based goals of the group.

[Aleric]

39. a fair criticism

I only called out the dems here because DU is their turf and I used to expect more of them.

[patrice]

43. I've been here a long time. I don't think it is simply Demturf right now, or if it ever has been. nt

[Aleric]

52. well..

I don't really come here to commiserate with liberals and progressives. I come here to engage and piss off democrats. :) Perhaps someday they will be the same thing again.

[patrice]

53. I'm an active involved rational empiricist, who loves Freedom, believes in a gestalt called Us, and

enjoys the challenge and mental exercise of coming here and participating in whatever is going on.

There are those here who would characterize that as believing in nothing, but I see it as quite the contrary; a process referred to as real Freedom depends upon clarifying and being honest and strong enough in understanding to be humble without ever giving up.

[Historic NY]

6. better go to the early posting....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4731671

I just love these AP sourced postings, the slight nuancing of words and flippant manipulation. Unnamed sources, anominity these stories are always cloaked in this manner.

[uppityperson]

11. Indeed. "Sources" is a poor source and it is always good to READ THE ARTICLE.

I am in the minority it seems in outrage at "sources say" cherry picked paragraphs. It is very easy to be outraged, I'd rather save mine for when it counts as am getting tired. Must conserve my outrage.

Glad you see the value in "sources" etc also. I mean invalue.

[patrice]

10. That couldn't possibly be; anyone who isn't with "us" is against us and all of us know that

Obama isn't with us.

:sarcasm:

[Mass]

14. So, when do we start attacking the real problem of costs,

My ds goes to UMass (not a private college) with instate tuition.When all is paid (tuitions, fees, and a dorms/food), the cost is more than $20,000 a year (and the Mass state universities are nearly as expensive). He was lucky enough to find free loans, grants and scholarships and keep the government loans to a minimum, but I feel sorry for other kids who have much higher loans.

As the govenment insists that kids go to college, they may want to look at the reasons why even state colleges and universities are so expensive and how to make it more affordable.

[uppityperson]

16. I totally agree. The problem is not just finding funding but dealing with the costs.

Community colleges have picked up a lot over the last few yrs, people getting their first 2 yrs in at a more affordable place. But even they are increasing costs.

I'd like to see them address increasing college costs also.

[patrice]

22. Agreed! except for "As the government insists ..., THEY ..." anything. We need independent grassroot

s organizations that assess and evaluate education at all levels according to consensually agreed upon widely-based standards that describe the responsibilities and performance of ALL stake-holders: institutional, government at various levels, students, parents. Amongst the traits that could be considered could be things such as: institutional salaries and other forms of overhead for how they do or do not contribute to academic success; degree of dialogue amongst all stake-holders; macro-economic environment; school culture . . . just to brainstorm a few.

My main point here is that this idea that government is supposed to do it all casts a monkey-wrench in the works EVERY time. Government SHOULD fulfill all of it's responsibilities to ALL of the people. But the people NEED to fulfill ALL of their own responsibilities for themselves and independent, non-sectarian, standards organizations could go a long way toward improving the WHOLE discourse on ANY issue.

[datasuspect]

19. people need to learn their fucking place in the scheme of things anyway

if you aren't good enough to be born into a rich family where education expenses are taken care of by your parents through a trust fund or some other financial arrangement, you really have no one to blame but yourself.

financial aid recipients should pull themselves up by their bootstraps and serve their country first so they can EARN their way through college using the GI Bull and other incentives the military provides.

more poor people need to "serve" their country anyway.

you simply cannot have the scions of wealth (our future deciders) sully their beautiful minds with something as mundane as combat.

[patrice]

42. I'd be willing to bet "good" money that a significant amount of this aid IS going to those who don't

need it.

[DevonRex]

21. So he's not actually cutting Pell grants. Thank you. K&R. nt

[uppityperson]

24. You are welcome

it is like herding cats.

[DevonRex]

26. I have to wonder about all the misinformation that has been posted

about this previously. I mean, WTF?

[patrice]

30. Anonymity creates ALL kinds of motivation fueled on buzzy ego-inflation and delivering not but a

whimper - which could very well be THE objective of many of the anonymous.

[KeepItReal]

29. Actually he is capping Pell Grants and not allowing cost of living increases

as well as not allowing their use for summer school.

Here's the way they were supposed to work:

Starting in summer 2010, students will be able to use their Federal Pell Grant Program federal aid toward their summer college courses. In the Past, a college student could only use these grant funds for spring and fall college programs.

Students who take advantage of this federal aid for their summer courses can complete their college degree programs more quickly, which can save additional money in tuition and room and board costs.

This significant change to how the Pell Grant is administered joins other recent changes to this federal financial aid program. In 2009, President Obama increased the annual maximum financial aid award offered by the Pell Grant program. In 2009, the federal aid program’s maximum award was increased 13%, up to $5,350. The administration plans to continue increasing the maximum award to an estimated $6,900 in 2019, in accordance with projected inflation trends in college costs such as tuition and room and board.

http://www.campusexplorer.com/college-advice-tips/1FA6316F/Pell-Grant-Can-Be-Used-for-Summer-College-Courses-Starting-in-Summer-2010/

[silver10]

31. That makes it all better then

Because the cost of living never increases.

[ProSense]

36. That says nothing of the sort. n/t

[KeepItReal]

38. Link to the changes Obama approved previously

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4731671&mesg_id=4731690

[ProSense]

47. What does an article from March 2010 have to do with what you posted earlier?

He has increased the award and the number of students eligible.

[kiva]

32. No, this just makes it harder for students to

complete a degree within the 'normal' time (which is actually getting longer). Schools are cutting back on classes because of budget slashes - no, it doesn't make sense to cut classes when demand is rising, but state funded schools are forced to do it; this means that students often cannot get into required classes the first, or even second time they try to register.

Students who are academically unprepared for class and need to take remedial classes - usually math and English - also cannot make it through a degree in the ideal number of years without access to summer classes. These students are disproportionately working class, and very much in need of financial aid.

Part of the reason I like liberals is that they look beyond their own situtation to see the needs of others...but hey, whatever.

[bluestateguy]

33. He also cut the big banks out of the student loan program

and promoted more direct borrowing from the government rather than the banks.

I'll expect a thank you note from Jane Hamsher in the morning.

[DevonRex]

34. That's my favorite thing. The interest rates were just outrageous.

:hi:

[uppityperson]

41. That was a really good thing. Cut interest rates that way.

[Scurrilous]

46. K & R

:thumbsup: