[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                THE HISTORY AND CONTINUED CONTRIBUTIONS
                  OF TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               Before The

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION 
                          AND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT

                                 OF THE

                    COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________


             HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 19, 2022

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-51

                               __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor
      
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]      


        Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
        
                                 __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
58-474 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2025                  
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     

                   COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR

             ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia, Chairman

RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona            VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina,
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut              Ranking Member
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,      JOE WILSON, South Carolina
  Northern Marina Islands            GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania
FREDERICA WILSON, Florida            TIM WALBERG, Michigan
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
MARK TAKANO, California              ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina        RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
MARK DeSAULNIER, California          JIM BANKS, Indiana
DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey          JAMES COMER, Kentucky
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington          RUSS FULCHER, Idaho
JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York          FRED KELLER, Pennsylvania
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania             MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
LUCY McBATH, Georgia                 BURGESS OWENS, Utah
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut            BOB GOOD, Virginia
ANDY LEVIN, Michigan, Vice Chairman  LISA McCLAIN, Michigan
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota                DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan           MARY MILLER, Illinios
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico   VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
MONDAIRE JONES, New York             SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin
KATHY MANNING, North Carolina        MADISON CAWTHORN, North Carolina
FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana              MICHELLE STEEL, California
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York              CHRIS JACOBS, New York
SHEILA CHERFILUS-McCORMICK, Florida  VACANCY
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin                VACANCY
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
KWEISI MFUME, Maryland

                   Veronique Pluviose, Staff Director
                  Cyrus Artz, Minority Staff Director
                                 ------                                

       SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE INVESTMENT

                 FREDERICA WILSON, Florida, Chairwoman

MARK TAKANO, California              MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa,
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington            Ranking Member
ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota                GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, Minnesota    ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
MONDAIRE JONES, New York             JIM BANKS, Indiana
KATHY E. MANNING, North Carolina     JAMES COMER, Kentucky
JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York              RUSS FULCHER, Idaho
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin                BOB GOOD, Virginia
JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas                LISA McCLAIN, Michigan
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey           DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York          VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona            CHRIS JACOBS, New York
JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut            VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina (Ex 
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon                 Officio)
ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, Virginia  VACANCY
    (Ex Officio)
                        
                        C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on July 19, 2022....................................     1

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

    Bonamici, Hon. Suzanne, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Higher 
      Education and Workforce Investment:........................     1
        Prepared statement of....................................     5
    Miller-Meeks, Hon. Mariannette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee 
      on Higher Education and Workforce Investment:..............     6
        Prepared statement of....................................     8

                               WITNESSES

    Lindquist, Dr. Cynthia, President, Cankdeska Cikana Community 
      College
        Prepared statement of....................................    11
    Billy, Carrie, President & CEO, American Indian Higher 
      Education Consortium (AIHEC)...............................    15
        Prepared statement of....................................    18
    Akers, Dr. Beth, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute    34
        Prepared statement of....................................    37
    Boham, Dr. Sandra, President, Salish Kootenai College........    40
        Prepared statement of....................................    42

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Responses to questions submitted for the record by:
        Ms. Carrie L. Billy......................................    68
        Dr. Cynthia Lindquist....................................    72

 
                       THE HISTORY AND CONTINUED
                    CONTRIBUTIONS OF TRIBAL COLLEGES
                            AND UNIVERSITIES

                              ----------                              


                         Tuesday, July 19, 2022

                  House of Representatives,
    Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 
                                        Investment,
                          Committee on Education and Labor,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:20 a.m., 
2175 Rayburn Office Building, Hon. Suzanne Bonamici (Chairwoman 
of the Subcommittee) presiding.
    Present: Representatives Leger Fernandez, Bowman, Pocan, 
Espaillat, Scott (Ex Officio), Miller-Meeks, Grothman, 
Stefanik, Comer, Good, Harshbarger, Jacobs, and Foxx (Ex 
Officio).
    Staff present: Brittany Alston, Staff Assistant; Amaris 
Benavidez, Fellow; Jessica Bowen Gall, Professional Staff; 
Nekea Brown, Director of Operations; Rashage Green, Director of 
Education Policy; Christian Haines, General Counsel; Rasheedah 
Hasan, Chief Clerk; Sheila Havenner, Director of Information 
Technology; Sharon Kwon, Professional Staff; Stephanie Lalle, 
Communications Director; Kota Mizutani, Deputy Communication 
Director; Max Moore, Staff Assistant; Kayla Pennebecker, Staff 
Assistant; Veronique Pluviose, Staff Director; Dhrtvan Sherman, 
Staff Assistant; Banyon Vassar, Deputy Director of Information 
Technology; Sam Varie, Press Secretary; Claire Viall, 
Professional Staff; ArRone Washington, Clerk and Special 
Assistant to the Staff Director; Cyrus Artz, Minority Staff 
Director; Cody Christensen, Minority Research Assistant; Cate 
Dillon, Minority Director of Operations; Mini Ganesh, Minority 
Staff Assistant; Amy Raaf Jones, Minority Director of Education 
and Human Resources Policy; Hannah Matesic, Minority Director 
of Member Services and Coalitions; Audra McGeorge, Minority 
Communications Director; Eli Mitchell, Minority Legislative 
Assistant; Ethan Pann, Minority Press Assistant; Gabriella 
Pistone, Minority Staff Assistant; Krystina Skurk, Minority 
Speechwriter; Mary Christina Riley, Minority Professional Staff 
Member; Chance Russell, Minority Professional Staff Member; 
Mandy Schaumburg, Minority Chief Counsel and Deputy Director of 
Education Policy; and Billy Wade, Minority Research Assistant.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. We will come to order. Welcome 
everyone. I note that a quorum is present. The subcommittee is 
meeting today to hear testimony today on the history and 
continued contributions of tribal colleges and universities. 
This is a hybrid hearing pursuant to House Resolution 8, and 
the regulations thereto.
    All microphones both in the room and on the platform will 
be kept muted as a general rule to avoid unnecessary background 
noise. Members and witnesses will be responsible for unmuting 
themselves when they are recognized to speak, or when they wish 
to seek recognition.
    When members wish to speak or seek recognition, they should 
unmute themselves and allow for a pause of 2 seconds to ensure 
the microphone picks up your speech. I also ask that members 
please identify themselves before they speak. Members who are 
participating in person should not be logged on to the remote 
platform to avoid feedback, echoes and distortion.
    Members participating remotely shall be considered present 
in the proceeding when they are visible on camera, and they 
shall be considered not present when they are not visible on 
camera. The only exception to this is if they are experiencing 
technical difficulty and inform committee staff of such 
difficulty.
    If any member experiences technical difficulty during the 
hearing, you should stay connected on the platform, make sure 
you are muted, and use your phone to immediately call the 
committee's IT director whose number was provided in advance.
    Should the Chair need to step away for any reason, Chairman 
Scott, or another majority member is hereby authorized to 
assume the gavel in the Chair's absence. To ensure that the 
committee's 5-minute rule is adhered to, staff will be keeping 
track of time using the committee's digital timer on the remote 
platform.
    For members participating in person, the timer will be 
broadcast in the committee room on the television monitor as 
part of the platform gallery view, and visible in its own 
thumbnail window. The committee room timer will not be in use.
    For members participating remotely this will be visible in 
gallery view in its own thumbnail window on the remote 
platform. Members are asked to wrap up promptly when their time 
has expired.
    Finally, while the recent guidance from the Office of 
Attending Physician has made mask wearing optional at this 
time, please know that we have in our midst, both at the member 
and staff levels, individuals who are immunocompromised and/or 
who have immediate family members who are immunocompromised as 
well as who are not vaccinated either due to medical reasons, 
or because the vaccine is not yet available to all children 
under 6 months of age.
    Therefore, the committee strongly recommends that masks 
continue to be worn out of the concern for the safety of the 
unvaccinated and immunocompromised members and staff, and their 
families.
    Pursuant to committee rule 8(c), opening statements are 
limited to the Chair and the Ranking Member. This allows us to 
hear from our witnesses sooner and provides all members with 
adequate time to ask questions. I recognize myself for the 
purpose of making an opening statement.
    Thank you to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and 
to the witnesses for being here this morning. Today we are 
meeting to discuss the unique history and value of tribal 
colleges and universities, or TCUs. This is our third hearing 
this Congress to examine institutions that are critical to 
serving historically underserved students.
    Tribal colleges and universities were founded in part to 
help combat cultural erasure after the systematic decimation of 
Native communities. These communities have been deeply marked 
by historical trauma, stemming in part from the use of 
education as a tool of government forced assimilation.
    TCUs now play a critical role in protecting and preserving 
culture and traditions. They also provide support to Native 
American students to help them succeed and meaningfully 
contribute to the self-governance of their nations.
    Today there are 35 accredited TCUs serving more than 27,000 
students representing more than 250 federally recognized 
tribes. Each of these 35 institutions plays a critical role in 
the education of Native students by providing an affordable, 
culturally based education, and a supportive learning 
environment.
    In addition, these institutions often provide essential 
resources to the communities in which they are located. 
Northwest Indian College for example, a 2-year TCU in 
Bellingham, Washington, is the only tribal college in the 
Pacific Northwest, and it serves students from Washington, 
Idaho, and my home State of Oregon.
    NWIC offers a number of bachelor's and associate's degree 
programs that illustrate the unique nature of TCUs. A few 
examples of these programs include Native Studies Leadership, 
Tribal Governance and Business Management, and Early Childhood 
Education. NWIC also has a number of activities, organizations, 
and support networks on campus intended to help students 
succeed and feel at home on campus.
    Beyond providing a culturally based education, and 
fostering a sense of belonging, TCUs strive to help Native 
students complete their education by taking steps to meet basic 
needs, and reducing financial barriers, and the need is great. 
A survey of several TCUs in 2019 found that 80 percent of their 
students experienced food insecurity, housing insecurity, or 
homelessness.
    To help address these barriers to completion, TCUs have 
built successful, in-house programs that support the basic 
needs of their students. Although they have an important role, 
TCUs often lack resources because they do not have the same 
access to funding from State and local governments as other 
colleges and universities.
    As a result, TCUs are chronically underfunded, and face 
limitations on their institutional capacity to support the 
students they serve. For example, it is not uncommon for a 
professor to also be an advisor, administrator, and source of 
technical support as part of their day to day duties.
    Despite these challenges, these institutions are resilient. 
They implement innovative programming and solutions to keep 
costs down and support their students. To bolster these efforts 
and improve student outcomes, we must increase Federal support 
for TCUs.
    House Democrats delivered unprecedented funding to help 
TCUs endure the disproportionate effect of the COVID-19 
pandemic on Native communities. Through three COVID relief 
bills, including the American Rescue Plan, Congress delivered 
367 million dollars in targeted funding to TCUs.
    These funds helped prevent students from experiencing 
homelessness, hunger, and other hardships, and provided 
institutions with resources to protect the health and safety of 
campus communities during the pandemic.
    Although these bills provided desperately needed aid to 
students and institutions, we know TCUs need sustained and 
enhanced investments if they are to continue to fulfill the 
legacy of promise of higher education.
    I look forward to learning more from today's witnesses 
about the successes of TCUs, the challenges they face, and how 
Congress can deliver the support these vital institutions need 
to continue to provide a high-quality affordable education for 
generations to come. I want to thank our distinguished 
witnesses again for being with us today, and I now am happy to 
yield to the new Ranking Member, Mrs. Miller-Meeks for her 
opening statement.
    [The statement of Chairwoman Bonamici follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you, Chairwoman Bonamici. 
Republicans value the role of all minority serving 
institutions, including tribal colleges and universities, but 
my colleagues and I have participated in the two previous 
hearings on minority serving institutions, and today is the 
third. The Democrats have held no hearing dedicated to fixing 
the spiraling student loan catastrophe.
    Respectfully, I must ask what are Democrats afraid of? Are 
they afraid republicans will call them out for doubling down on 
a failing system? Are they afraid republicans will point out 
their student loan forgiveness scheme will do nothing to 
address the skyrocketing cost of college?
    Or are they afraid that republicans will point out that 
congressional Democrats have turned a blind eye to executive 
overreach? Whatever the reason, it is time for Democrats to do 
what is right for the American people. All students, including 
those at TCUs are impacted by our broken, postsecondary 
education system, which creates an incentive for higher tuition 
cost, poor student outcomes, and unaffordable debt for many 
Americans.
    Over the last 50 years, we have seen college costs rise at 
over five times the rate of inflation, causing students and 
their parents to borrow more. Something has gone wrong. Instead 
of fixing the root cause of our student debt problems, such as 
ballooning college cost, and lack of accountability for poor 
performing programs, Democrats are content doing nothing, and 
doing what they always do--throwing more money at the problem 
and expecting a different outcome.
    Instead of looking at data to determine who is borrowing 
more and why, and reforming the system, Democrats are pursuing 
misguided, massive student loan forgiveness. This is a major 
mistake. Let us be clear about one thing, there is no such 
thing as student loan forgiveness. These loans do not go away. 
Democrats are simply making a massive transfer of wealth from 
hard-working taxpayers to the most affluent in our society.
    These policies are reverse Robin Hoods, taking from the 
poor to pay the rich. That is exactly what the Democrats want 
to do. Blanket student loan forgiveness is irresponsible. It is 
unfair to force those that never went to college to foot the 
bill for those who did.
    Why should a factory worker, or a farmer in Iowa, pay for a 
lawyer's graduate degree? What about those who worked hard for 
years to pay off their loans, or never took out loans? The 
student that purposely chose a less expensive college to save 
money? Is it fair to ask these individuals to pay for someone 
else's degree? No.
    Further, if Democrats believe student loan debt is a 
problem, why are they not willing to hold a hearing on the 
topic? By not holding a hearing, or asking the tough questions 
about fixing our loan system, Democrats are showing that they 
are comfortable ceding their congressional authority to the 
Biden administration, who in the last year and a half has 
already extended the repayment pause four times without 
legitimate reason, and is changing the rules for multiple 
programs--changes that would not pass Congress.
    It is time for the congressional Democrats to take their 
legislative duties seriously and work across the aisle to 
reform our Federal student loan system. The status quo is not 
an option. Thank you, chairwoman, I yield back.
    [The statement of Ranking Member Miller-Meeks follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you to the--excuse me, to the 
Ranking Member. I do want to note that it is disappointing that 
the minority today has chosen not to engage with the premise of 
our hearing today, which is to highlight and discuss the 
important contributions of tribal colleges and universities.
    TCUs have a unique mission of not only educating Native 
communities, but also preserving and advancing Native American 
culture and traditions. Instead, the minority has decided to 
disregard the historic nature of this hearing, and instead try 
to co-op this hearing to discuss reforms to the student loan 
program, even though we have already had multiple hearings on 
the topic.
    I am also concerned because only one TCU participates in 
the loan program. Our focus needs to be on TCUs today. As our 
witnesses will highlight, TCUs play a key role in Native 
education by providing students with a holistically supportive 
learning environment, and an education that incorporates Native 
culture, language and traditions, and further Federal 
investment is necessary to ensure these institutions can 
continue and expand their important work.
    I am going to now introduce the witnesses. First Ms. Carrie 
Billy is the President and CEO of the American Indian High 
Education Consortium, or AIHEC. Ms. Billy was appointed 
President and CEO of AIHEC in 2008. She is an enrolled member 
of the Navajo Nation and was appointed by President Clinton as 
the Inaugural Executive Director of the White House Initiative 
on Tribal Colleges.
    Ms. Billy has an undergraduate degree from the University 
of Arizona, and also from Salish Kootenai College, and a Juris 
Doctorate from Georgetown University Law Center.
    Dr. Cynthia Lindquist, Ph.D. is the President of Cankdeska 
Cikana or Little Hoop Community College, CCCC. Dr. Lindquist 
has served as President of CCCC, a TCU in North Dakota since 
2003. Dr. Lindquist received a Ph.D. in educational leadership 
from the University of North Dakota. She also holds a master's 
in public administration with an emphasis on tribal health 
systems from the University of South Dakota, and also a 
bachelor's in Indian studies in English from the University of 
North Dakota.
    Dr. Lindquist is an enrolled member of the Spirit Lake 
Dakota Nation. I regret to inform everyone today that Dr. 
Lindquist will not be able to testify as part of today's 
hearing, but without objection her written statement will be 
made part of the hearing record, so ordered.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Lindquist follows.]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Dr. Elizabeth or Beth J. Akers, Ph.D. 
is a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a 
conservative think tank. Previously, she was a Senior Fellow at 
the Manhattan Institute. Dr. Akers received a BS in mathematics 
and economics from SUNY Albany, and a Ph.D. in economics from 
Columbia University.
    Dr. Sandra Boham is the President of Salish Kootenai 
College. In 2016, Dr. Boham became President of the college, a 
TCU located in Montana, after serving as Vice President of 
Academic Affairs. Dr. Boham is an enrolled member of the 
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Indian 
Reservation.
    She earned her Doctorate of Education and Educational 
Leadership from the University of Montana. She holds a master's 
in education from Montana State University, and a Bachelor of 
Arts in Sociology from the University of Montana.
    We appreciate the witnesses for participating today, and we 
look forward to your testimony. Let me remind the witnesses 
that we have read your written statements, and they will appear 
in full in the hearing record. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(d) 
and committee practice, each of you is asked to limit your oral 
presentation to a 5-minute summary of your written statement.
    Before you begin your testimony, please remember to unmute 
your microphone. During your testimony staff will be keeping 
track of time, and a light will blink when time is up. Please 
be attentive to the time. Wrap up when your time is over and 
re-mute your microphone. If any of you experience technical 
difficulty during your testimony, or later in the hearing, 
please stay connected on the platform, make sure you are muted, 
and use your phone to immediately call the committee's IT 
director whose number was provided in advance.
    We will let all the witnesses make their presentations 
before we move to member questions. When answering a question 
please remember to unmute your microphone. The witnesses are 
aware of their responsibility to provide accurate information 
to the subcommittee, and therefore we will proceed.
    I will first recognize Ms. Billy. You are recognized for 5 
minutes for your testimony.

  STATEMENT OF MS. CARRIE BILLY, PRESIDENT AND CEO, AMERICAN 
               INDIAN HIGHER EDUCATION CONSORTIUM

    Ms. Billy. I thank Chairwoman Bonamici, Ranking Member 
Miller-Meeks, and members of the committee. I am Carrie Billy, 
the President and CEO of AIHEC, which is the tribal colleges 
and universities. Thank you for inviting me to testify today at 
this historic hearing. It really is one of few hearings that 
have been held by the Congress on the subject of tribal 
colleges, so we appreciate it.
    Tribal colleges and universities are part of who we are as 
American Indian and Alaska Native people. They emerged from our 
history, culture, and spirituality for two reasons--the near 
complete failure of the U.S. Higher Education System to meet 
the needs of, or even include American Indians and Alaska 
Natives, and the need to preserve and revitalize our culture, 
languages, lands, our past, and our future.
    In the 1960's, a group of Navajo educators came together 
and asked our parents how do you want our schools to look? 
Simple, but empowering words that had never been asked before. 
That question--how do you want our schools to look, led to the 
greatest experiment and experience in tribal self-determination 
ever, the tribal college movement.
    Higher education taught from our own world view, in our own 
communities for and by our own people. Carol Davis, who is the 
founder of Turtle Mountain Community College in Belcourt, North 
Dakota says when we started in the 1970's, there were five 
people on her reservation with a college degree. She was not 
one of them.
    Now there are thousands. It is the same throughout Indian 
country, and from that one college on the Navajo Nation, we now 
have 35 accredited tribal colleges serving more than 130,000 
American Indians and Alaskan Natives, and other rural community 
members each year through academic and community-based programs 
at more than 75 sites in 15 states.
    Our students come from well more than half of all federally 
recognized Indian tribes and about 30 states. The goal of every 
tribal college is to build our own education system founded on 
our ways of knowing, traditional knowledge, and spirituality. 
The vision is shared--strong, sovereign, tribal nations, 
through excellence in tribal higher education.
    Tribal colleges are place based institutions. They take 
hope, ideas, and pitifully few dollars, and shape them into 
opportunity. They are doing this amid harsh conditions. Most 
tribal colleges are located on federally recognized Indian 
reservations, rural and remote regions of America with the 
highest generational unemployment, and high school dropout 
rates in the country.
    Tribal colleges are also severely underfunded. The 
responsibility for providing operating support for tribal 
colleges falls to the Federal Government because of the Federal 
trust responsibility, treaty obligations, and the exchange of 
over one billion acres of land.
    The average TCU receives only about a little more than 
$8,000 per Indian student, with no operating support for non-
enrolled tribal members, and little or no funding from the 
states, although tribal colleges are public institutions. 
$8,000 may sound like a lot per student, but it is not. Tribal 
colleges are very small institutions ranging from about 100 to 
just under 2,000 students, yet they are accredited by the same 
accrediting bodies that accredit other institutions of higher 
education.
    They offer a range of certificates, associate's and 
bachelor's degrees, and even a small number of master's levels 
programs, along with extensive community-based education 
programs. Anything you need to build the Nation you will find 
at tribal colleges. Tribal colleges are nation builders, but 
they are affordable nation builders. That is why only one 
engages in the student loan program.
    The average tribal college tuition is a little over 
$3,000.00 per year, yet tribal colleges lead in several areas 
in awarding American Indian and Alaskan Native degrees in 
accounting, business, construction, natural resource 
conservation, computer and information science, and of course 
in producing Native teachers and nurses.
    Tribal colleges are growing a Native workforce, who 
graduate debt free, and contribute to the local tax base. For 
example, and they are also doing a lot of other things not 
limited to academics. The Tribal College mission extends beyond 
that including languages, lands, sovereignty and restoring 
identity. In fact, the largest group of Aaniiih Dakota speakers 
are Aaniiih speakers today in the world are graduates of the 
Aaniiih Dakota College White Clay Immersion School, which the 
college operates on its campus.
    In the last few seconds, I would like to briefly turn to 
the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020, going into the pandemic 
we knew that tribal colleges had the slowest internet access at 
the highest costs using the oldest equipment of any 
institutions in the country. Several TCs have never offered 
online courses, and only two or three at little, tiny health 
centers. 15 percent of our students already had severe mental 
health needs.
    Those needs have continued to worsen as the pandemic has 
continued, and it has hit our institutions as hard as it has 
hit our people, statistically worse than anyone or anywhere 
else in this country. We continue to need your support, and we 
continue to be proud and thankful of the partnership we have 
with this important committee. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Carrie Billy follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you, Ms. Billy. Next, I 
recognize Dr. Akers for 5 minutes for your testimony.

STATEMENT OF DR. BETH AKERS, SENIOR FELLOW, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE 
                           INSTITUTE

    Dr. Akers. Good morning, Chairwoman Wilson, and Ranking 
Member Miller-Meeks, and the members of the subcommittee. Thank 
you for the opportunity to share my testimony today. I 
appreciate that the invitation here today is in regard to the 
topic of tribal colleges and universities, an important segment 
of our overall system of higher education.
    These institutions face a distinct challenge--educating an 
otherwise unserved population, often in rural communities, 
without thriving, local economies. Unfortunately, these 
institutions do not have an impressive track record of 
delivering their students into economic opportunity. Tribal 
colleges and universities have low graduation rates, with just 
20 percent of beginning students completing a degree within 6 
years.
    Students enrolling at tribal colleges and universities are 
not the only ones being let down by our system of higher 
education. The students being served annually at tribal 
colleges and universities represent just a small share of the 
millions of students enrolling in institutions of higher 
education in the United States each year.
    Investing in education beyond high school is one of the 
surest pathways to economic prosperity in the United States. 
However, not all students who invest in higher education will 
earn the typical return. Some students will end up worse off 
financially than when they began. Education beyond high school 
is a good investment on average, but it can be a financial 
risk.
    I believe that the financial risk associated with post-
secondary education is the single greatest impediment to our 
system of higher education, better serving both students and 
taxpayers. Systemic reform through legislation is necessary to 
make investing in higher education less risky for students, and 
also to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently.
    This can largely be accomplished through a small number of 
deep reforms to the Federal Student Loan Program. First, we 
need to prevent colleges with the track record of poor student 
outcomes from accessing the Federal Student Aid Program. Too 
often, students are borrowing sums of money through the Federal 
Student Loan Program that are predictably unaffordable based on 
the experiences of previous students.
    Instead of using the arbitrary process of accreditation as 
the gatekeeper to Federal student aid, including student loans, 
we should judge institutions based on their track record of 
student success. Schools and programs of study that 
persistently fail to deliver their students into opportunities 
that would make loan repayment affordable, should not be 
allowed to continue their participation in these taxpayer 
funded programs.
    Second, we need to eliminate the patchwork of existing 
student loan repayment programs, and replace it with a single, 
well-functioning, income-driven repayment program that will be 
easier for student borrowers to navigate, and also simpler for 
the Department of Education to effectively administer.
    Last, we need to stop allowing students in graduate and 
professional schools from borrowing without limit. This is 
problematic for three reasons. First, it enables student 
borrowers to take out sums of debt that are inappropriately 
large relative to their expected future income. It is 
irresponsible, both to students and taxpayers, to allow 
students to borrow sums of money without regard to whether it 
will be affordable to repay.
    Second, it makes students less sensitive to the prices they 
face and thus allows institutions to raise prices more 
aggressively than they would have otherwise. Last, limitless 
borrowing, paired with the ability to make relatively low 
monthly payments and income driven repayment program, has 
increased the incidence of borrowers with high incomes having 
very large debts forgiven.
    Student loan relief should be reserved for lower income 
borrowers who are truly struggling with repayment. At the same 
time, we need to reject calls for quick fixes, like widespread 
student loan cancellation, which would exacerbate current 
systemic challenges, while costing taxpayers billions.
    Forgiving student debt through a mass cancellation event 
would send the message to future borrowers that they will not 
be on the hook to repay every dollar they borrow. The 
expectation of a future bailout will encourage future students 
to pay more for college, and borrow more than they would have 
otherwise. The resulting increased willingness to pay will 
allow institutions to raise their prices further, thus 
exacerbating already troubling tuition inflation.
    The CRFB has estimated that even a means-tested loans 
cancellation event of up to $10,000 per borrower, would cost 
taxpayers 250 billion dollars. While some have argued in the 
past that deficit spending is without consequence, recent 
trends and inflation have proven that to be incorrect.
    This spending will necessarily take resources away from 
other programs that effectively target aid to more needy 
Americans.
    Additionally, widespread student loan cancellation is not a 
program that helps the poor. Most economists agree that a one-
time event would be regressive, delivering the largest benefits 
to workers with the highest income.
    This is because borrowers with large balances also tend to 
have very high earnings, and because the neediest workers in 
our economy--those without any college education, do not carry 
any student debt, and do not stand to benefit through a 
cancellation event.
    Thank you for the opportunity to share my testimony here 
today.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Beth Akers follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you. Next, I recognize Dr. Boham 
for 5 minutes for your testimony.

   STATEMENT OF DR. SANDRA BOHAM, PRESIDENT, SALISH KOOTENAI 
                            COLLEGE

    Dr. Boham. [Speaking in Native language.] Thank you. Madam 
Chair, distinguished members of the committee, I am Dr. Sandra 
Boham. I am the current serving President of Salish Kootenai 
College in Pablo, Montana, on the Flathead Indian Reservation. 
I am very honored to speak with you today.
    As you heard, tribal colleges are place based, mission 
focused institutions, and tribal colleges serve critical roles 
in preparing American Indian and Alaskan Native students for 
success, as well as strengthening and sustaining our tribes, 
tribal communities, lands, language and culture.
    Like all colleges, Salish Kootenai College was established 
to address the near complete failure of higher education for 
American Indians, but also the need to perpetuate our culture, 
language, lands and sovereignty.
    The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead 
Indian Reservation chartered Salish Kootenai College in 1977. 
It is the mission of our college to strengthen our community, 
perpetuate our culture, and for us that means grounding our 
programs in the values, principles, and world view at the 
Salish, Ksanka, and Quiispe people.
    The impact of Salish Kootenai College for the Confederated 
Salish and Kootenai Tribes in the Reservation, and Indian 
Country at the tribal, State, and local level is significant. 
Salish Kootenai College has provided a skilled workforce that 
has assisted the tribe to become a very successful self-
governance tribe.
    Today the tribe operates a hydro-electric dam, a bison 
range, natural resource departments, and a tribal health 
system. To meet the needs of the tribe and reservation 
community, Salish Kootenai College has workforce certificates, 
certificates of completion, associate's degrees, bachelor's 
degrees, and just began two master's degrees that are 
responsive to tribal needs.
    All of the programs that we offer at SKC are grounded in 
our tribe's distinctive and resilient world view. Salish 
Kootenai College has always aggressively worked to sustain our 
tribal languages, culture and community are essential. The 
COVID pandemic created an increased sense of urgency with the 
loss of many of our tribal elders.
    In our efforts to perpetuate our language and culture, 
Salish Kootenai College developed education programs to the P-
12 system. We have teaching programs in elementary, secondary, 
but what you really need to know is that we started a program 
that is the Salish Language Teaching Program. It is a program 
that trains people with the language, but also allows them to 
have the information they need to successfully navigate the 
public education system.
    We have prepared nurses for the past 30 years, and our 
nursing program, as all of our programs, provide culturally 
competent, holistic approaches to serving the communities that 
we serve. Growing our own approach has been very successful, 
and many of our students--we stay in our community, or return 
to the communities that they come from.
    Our goal is to prepare students to choose whatever path 
they choose to take. Tribal college funding is very complex, 
and it makes budgeting long-term planning even more complex. At 
Salish Kootenai College, as all tribal colleges, we are open 
admissions. Today, Salish Kootenai College is approximately 70 
percent American Indian, and 30 percent non-Indian.
    The State of Montana does provide some funding for non-
Indian students, but it is very limited. We have not raised our 
tuition in at least 8 years. We learned something from COVID. 
We learned that adequately funded students can focus on their 
education, and they are not worrying about food, they are not 
worrying about their rent, they are not worrying about 
childcare, and they are not worried about not having access to 
mental health.
    COVID provided those essential funding resources so that we 
could meet those needs in our community and for our students, 
and allow our students to focus on their education and graduate 
successfully. Many of our students have families, and so they 
also have to juggle all of those responsibilities.
    In addition, our facilities will continue to need upgrading 
in response to the pandemic, and I thank you all very much for 
allowing me the time to testify this morning. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Sandra Boham follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you so much for your testimony, 
Dr. Boham. Under Committee Rule 9(a), we will now question 
witnesses under the 5-minute rule. I will be recognizing 
subcommittee members in seniority order. To ensure that the 
member's 5-minute rule is adhered to, staff will be keeping 
track of time, and a timer will show a blinking light when the 
time is expired.
    Please be attentive to the time, wrap up when your time is 
over and re-mute your microphone. As Chair, I recognize myself 
for 5 minutes.
    As I discussed in my opening statement, TCUs play an 
important and unique role in higher education by pursuing the 
critical mission of educating Native communities, while also 
preserving the cultures and traditions of their communities. 
Congress must commit to providing TCUs with the funding and 
resources they need to continue educating current and future 
generations of Native communities.
    I think Dr. Boham just clarified that the lessons learned 
from the COVID funding really did make a difference. I want to 
start by asking Ms. Billy, TCUs are designed to reach students 
who are historically underrepresented within higher education, 
native students, students from low-income families, students of 
color. These institutions also reach another unrepresented 
community, rural, students who often face significant 
challenges accessing and succeeding in higher education.
    I am going to ask you two things Ms. Billy. Discuss what 
important role TCUs play in rural communities, particularly 
those with higher populations of Tribal community members, and 
then also I want to ask you, you mentioned something about the 
question what should it look like? What should tribal education 
look like?
    I am from Oregon, home of the Chemawa Indian School, the 
oldest continuously operating boarding school in the United 
States. This committee has been working hard to improve Native 
K-12 education, and I expect that many of your students come to 
you from Native schools.
    Do you have suggestions on improvements that would make a 
positive difference to the students who join a TCU from a BIE 
school?
    Ms. Billy. Thank you. Thank you for those questions. Yes, 
most of the tribal colleges are located as I said on federally 
recognized Indian Reservations, very rural. Very rural 
institutions, and they are open door. It is important to know 
they are open door institutions. They serve students whether 
they are tribal members or non-tribal members.
    We have a number of students, and President Boham can talk 
about this, who are enrolled, particularly in nursing, 
teaching, all of our programs. They are open doors, so they are 
open to the entire community, so they uplift entire rural 
communities. They also provide essential community services and 
outreach and messaging to the communities, and community-based 
programming.
    Tribal colleges are 1994 land grants, so they provide 
extensive land grant services, providing agricultural support 
to agricultural providers, ranchers, farmers, throughout their 
communities, whether they are tribal or non-tribal, in just a 
wide range of ways they provide services to their entire 
communities.
    Also doing research, which is particularly unique to rural 
areas. We are working on an initiative of trying to figure out 
how to make apprenticeship work. If we could figure out how to 
make apprenticeship work in tribal communities, or on tribal 
lands, that will be extremely beneficial and helpful to rural 
communities.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you, Ms. Billy. I do not want to 
cut you off, but I would love to get just a brief answer 
because I want to try to get a question in to Dr. Boham as 
well, about the advice in terms of the K-12, particularly 
residential boarding schools.
    Ms. Billy. I think President Boham can answer that question 
best, because one of our suggestions is for tribal colleges to 
have the funding to have high school bridge programs and 
academies out there, or colleges, just like Salish Kootenai 
College has.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Terrific thanks. I will turn that over 
to President Boham. I also wanted to mention, President Boham, 
you mentioned the STEM academies that you have for students at 
SKC. I have been an advocate for education that stimulates both 
halves of the brain. As educators you know that the left side 
of the brain is more analytical, objective, and logical, and 
the right side more creative, emotional and visual, which is 
why I advocate for STEAM, integration of arts and design into 
STEM.
    You have mentioned the STEM Academy. Do your students also 
have the opportunity to integrate arts? Does the study of 
Native language and the teaching of ceremoneys, songs, and 
other cultural traditions help your students get the creative 
and critical thinking skills that are so important for the jobs 
of the future?
    Dr. Boham. Thank you, Madam Chair. We created that STEM 
Academy because we found a number of students articulated that 
they did not believe they were capable to do the high-level 
math that was needed in a STEM Program. They are highly 
capable.
    We reached out and got high school students to begin their 
day here taking those classes. We do require Native arts in all 
of our degree programs, and so they do get that other side of 
the brain. Our language and culture, our culture is built 
around a lot of what many people would consider to be art 
forms. They are very necessary skills, and some of them have 
practical life use.
    They are not just artistic, although they are beautiful, 
and the creation of them is artistic. In those like moccasin 
making, regalia making, jewelry making, those are all very 
important skills that many would consider to be art.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you, Dr. Boham. I am going to be 
submitting because my time is expired, I am going to be 
submitting the additional question for the record regarding the 
transition from particularly boarding schools, or other Native 
schools to TCUs. Now I am going to yield 5 minutes to the 
Ranking Member, Mrs. Miller-Meeks of Iowa for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you, Chairwoman Bonamici, and I 
want to thank all of our witnesses that are here today. The 
Republicans tremendously value the role of all minority serving 
institutions, including tribal colleges and universities. 
However, we have had three hearings on minority serving 
institutions, and zero hearings on dedicated to the need to 
reform student loan programs.
    Dr. Akers, I think it is important that in this 
subcommittee we review the data behind the Federal student loan 
portfolio and identify who in fact holds loan debt. As we have 
heard already this morning, students enrolled at TCUs often 
face socioeconomic, and other challenges when they decide they 
want to pursue a quality, postsecondary education.
    According to Federal data, roughly half of TCU students in 
a given year receive a Pell Grant, but it is my understanding 
that very few TCU students borrow for their education. Is that 
correct Dr. Akers?
    Dr. Akers. That is correct.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. How does this compare to students 
attending say State, public college, or a private non-profit?
    Dr. Akers. Much greater share of those students will be 
borrowing to pay for their education.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Given that information, would mass 
student loan forgiveness help the vast majority of TCU 
students, and please explain why?
    Dr. Akers. No. Not at all. TCU students who largely do not 
carry any student debt would not stand to benefit from the type 
of one-time cancellation event that is rumored to be coming 
shortly from the White House.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Despite their, you know, often 
challenging socioeconomic issues, it would not benefit to a 
significant degree by student loan debt forgiveness?
    Dr. Akers. That is right. That is correct. Generally, the 
people who will benefit from student loan cancellation tend to 
be of higher income. We know that 60 percent of outstanding 
student loan debt is held by borrowers in the top 40 percent of 
the income distribution. This group also makes three-quarters 
of loan payments, so this would be a benefit disproportionate 
to those people.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. I was going to ask you that. I would 
like to talk about the role of student choice in deciding what 
is done for higher education, and what an individual student 
does. I myself, I am a physician, but I actually started at 16 
when I left home, went to community college, as well as worked. 
I worked my way through. I chose to get a degree in nursing so 
I could work at night. I later got a master's in education, and 
then I went to medical school.
    With every decision I made to advance my education, I made 
another calculated decision knowing that I would be responsible 
for financing my education. I was the fourth of eight kids, and 
there was not a family that was going to support that 
education.
    According to Federal Reserve data, nearly 60 percent of 
outstanding student loan debt is held by borrowers with 
graduate degrees. During the Department's most recent 
negotiated rulemaking sessions, Department staff repeatedly 
noted the--expand the limited scope and not charge benefits to 
low-income borrowers.
    What potential consequences and costs, if the Department 
changes course, and includes graduate borrowers who hold the 
majority of loan debt, and yet another income-driven repayment 
plan that is expected to be far more generous than those 
already on the books.
    Dr. Akers. My concern with the existing programs, as well 
as the introduction of another, is the complexity of those 
programs. We know that students are having a challenging time 
navigating what benefits are available to them. The Department 
of Education is having a difficult time effectively 
administering those programs. The other concern is what happens 
to prices as especially graduate students are able to borrow 
without limit, anticipating that the marginal dollars that they 
borrow will necessarily be forgiven.
    This takes pressure off institutions to keep prices in line 
with value. In my view, it will likely exacerbate the 
exorbitant tuition inflation that we are already facing.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Dr. Akers, since March 2020, Federal 
student loan borrowers have not paid a single penny on their 
loans costing taxpayers 4.3 billion each month the pause has 
continued. This is despite the disproportionately low 
unemployment rate of college graduates who are largely spared 
from the economic consequences of COVID-19.
    While these individuals got to work from home, blue collar 
workers got laid off at rates unseen since the Great 
Depression. While most of these hardworking taxpayers have 
returned to work, they are still being forced to pay for 
affluent college graduate's now 2-year vacation from their 
student loans that have provided them their education in the 
first place.
    Dr. Akers, is there any justification for the repayment 
pause to be extended beyond August, yes or no?
    Dr. Akers. Absolutely not.
    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you very much. I yield back my 
time.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you. Next, I recognize 
Representative Leger Fernandez from New Mexico for 5 minutes 
for your questions.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you so much, Chair Bonamici, for 
holding this hearing today. Last month in the Subcommittee on 
Indigenous Peoples, we held a hearing on Representative David's 
Truth and Reconciliation Boarding School Bill. It seared in 
every committee member's memory the torture and harm we as a 
nation inflicted on students torn from their parents.
    The TCUs represent the complete opposite of the failed 
boarding school program, and I think we need to hear about 
them. We need to focus on them, and we need to honor them. That 
is why before I ask my questions I want to remind the minority 
that this is a hearing about the great work of tribal colleges 
and universities, and what they need to serve this important 
role.
    Especially, because they are reliant on us, on Congress for 
their funding. There are multiple TCUs throughout the Midwest, 
including institutions in Minnesota, North and South Dakota, 
and Nebraska. TCUs also likely serve students from Iowa. 
Instead of honoring the work of these TCUs, recognizing the 
needs of the tribal students as tending them, the minority has 
decided to hijack this hearing to score political points about 
student's loans, which we heard earlier today are not that 
applicable to TCUs in general.
    I am disappointed at my colleagues' behavior, and I 
apologize to our witnesses and their students, for the failure 
of both sides at this hearing to recognize the importance of 
these institutions. In New Mexico we have four TCUs, Dine 
College, Navajo Technical University, and the Institute of 
American Indian Arts.
    While TCUs represent the promise of fulfilling our trust 
responsibility, we also heard today how we are underfunding 
that promise. TCUs, we heard, only receive $8,676 per student. 
Compare this to the $28,601 that the average public colleges 
and universities spend per student.
    This I wanted to ask Dr. Boham. Thank you for pointing out 
the importance that the American Rescue Plan and COVID funding 
helped to meet the needs. You said it was quite distinct. What 
level of funding do you believe you actually need on an ongoing 
basis?
    Dr. Boham. What we need on an ongoing basis is funding to 
adequately address the mental health needs of our students, to 
adequately fund them, at least doubling the Pell Grant, so that 
they will have adequate resources for the tuition and books.
    One of the areas that we do not talk about is the 
incredible inflation that has happened, and it has happened in 
rural communities. Even though people make more money than you 
would think, like our faculty, they are just as heavily 
impacted by sometimes doubling and tripling rents that are 
happening in our very rural communities, due to COVID.
    We found, and I have the dollar figures, but we spent over 
$100,000 in mental health services, and normalized that 
conversation. We supported food sovereignty by providing food 
boxes every Friday with fresh produce and milk. We have a 
campus facility for healthcare that sees all students, tribal 
and nontribal. We upgraded the access to technology, both in 
fiber and internet connectivity, as well as by providing laptop 
checkouts and hot spots.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you, Dr. Boham. I wanted to be 
able to ask Ms. Billy a question, but this points out that we 
need to look at all of the different needs, and it should not 
take a pandemic to provide the adequate funding. Ms. Billy, I 
truly appreciated your testimony about the role that the TCUs 
play in nation building.
    What are some of the unique lessons that TCUs learn--that 
students learn at a TCU that might not exist in the separate 
community college or university, that does not have that focus 
on nation building, and on training the next leaders of our 
indigenous nations and tribes? You are on mute.
    Ms. Billy. One of the things that tribal college students 
learn that they do not get at other institutions--most other 
institutions, is a focus on their identity, their self. They 
take Native language courses. They have cultural activities on 
the campus that are integrated with the community, so they 
learn who they are as a Dine person, as a Salish person, and 
that sense of community is very strong at tribal colleges that 
does not exist anywhere else.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you very much, Ms. Billy. I 
think that sense of who you are and cultural competency in 
yourself is so essential to be able to accommodate others in 
your viewpoint as well. Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you. I now recognize 
Representative Grothman from Wisconsin for 5 minutes for your 
questions.
    Mr. Grothman. Thanks. Dr. Akers, I will ask you the first 
question. Student loan debt is something that really somewhat 
obsesses me because I really feel our secondary education 
system has let down a lot of people, and they have kind of 
delays their start in life as they try to pay these things off.
    I introduced a bill called the Responsible Borrowing Act, 
which will allow colleges to limit the amount of debt that is 
taken out by individual students. I heard it from some people 
back home, administrators back home who felt that under the 
current system people were taking out loans higher than they 
have to be, maybe to support a life style, what have you.
    Do you think it would be a good idea, and do you think it 
would benefit the tribal colleges if they could restrict the 
amount of loans that are given out?
    Dr. Akers. I do. I think that would benefit all colleges. 
Right now they can either offer loans or not, but do not have 
the capacity to constrain borrowing. I have heard that time and 
again from administrators, that this is a real challenge.
    Mr. Grothman. Yes. I should ask one of the other of you, 
would you like that opportunity? One of the other witnesses?
    Ms. Billy. This is Carrie Billy with AIHEC. Only one of our 
tribal colleges participates in the Federal loan program. It is 
difficult for us to answer that in a very comprehensive way.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. I will go on to the next question then. 
Dr. Akers, one of the things that concerns me in some of the 
things we learned today. I currently believe too many people 
are going to college. Some of these tribal colleges, I guess 
collectively, have an average graduation rate of 19 percent, 
and I guess I would say almost by definition if you have 
decided to go to college and you do not graduate in 6 years, 
that was a mistake.
    Do you feel--and given that the expected income is only 
$25,000 after 10 years, do you think it is in general good to 
encourage people to go to a tribal college, or should a lot of 
these people be encouraged to go somewhere else?
    Dr. Akers. The vast majority of people report they go to 
college for the purpose of getting an economic return. For 
those people--in going to a college like a TCU with a low 
graduation rate would not be a wise decision.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. I wonder, are you familiar with the 
type of degrees that the average student is getting? When I run 
into a young person, I always say make sure you have a plan. 
Make sure your degree is going to lead to a job--computers, 
cybersecurity, engineering, accounting, nursing, something--do 
you know what percentage of graduates of these tribal colleges 
wind up with a degree in that sort of thing?
    Not that we can get rid of other degrees all together, 
other degrees are important as well, but I think 
proportionately we have too many people getting degrees that 
are not leading to jobs. Could you comment on your experience 
with tribal colleges?
    Dr. Akers. I am not familiar with the distribution of 
majors and specialty programs at TCUs.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. Could you comment in general on the 
income level that people are getting when they get a 4-year 
degree from a tribal college?
    Dr. Akers. The biggest impediment to getting an economic 
return from a college degree is not graduating. The fact that 
we know that approximately 20 percent of students at these 
institutions are going out to--only 20 percent are going on to 
graduate means that it is unlikely that people are getting an 
earnings level that is in excess of the typical high school 
graduate in those communities.
    Mr. Grothman. What happens to the 81 percent who went to 
one of these colleges and do not get a degree in 6 years? By 
the way, I know a lot of people getting 4-year college degrees 
who wind up going back to tech school or trade school. I assume 
some of that 19 percent who actually get a degree perhaps 
regret it, but could you comment on what becomes of the 
students who the 81 percent of the students who do not get a 
degree?
    Dr. Akers. Sure. It would be nice if half of a college 
degree would get you half of the earnings boost that comes from 
having a full college degree, but unfortunately that is not the 
case. Generally, we find that somebody who has just a few 
credits here and there toward a degree, does not get any sort 
of earnings bump, but still is on the hook for the financial 
burden of paying for their degree.
    In that sense we sometimes say that these individuals are 
worse off than had they not gone to college in the first place.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. I am a little concerned with some of 
the comments that we have heard as far as the benefits of going 
to a tribal college, are not those benefits that I think other 
colleges give, of a more useful degree. Could you comment on 
that a little?
    Dr. Akers. No. As I said, I am not familiar with the 
distribution of majors and programs that are offered at these 
institutions.
    Mr. Grothman. Okay. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. I now recognize Mr. Bowman from New 
York for 5 minutes for your questions.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is for 
President Boham. Thank you so much for joining us today. It is 
clear that the pandemic has impacted the mental health of young 
people in this country, from infants and children in early care 
and education, through our students in higher education and 
entering the workforce.
    We know that the pandemic has disproportionately affected 
Native communities, and so ensuring that your students have 
access to high-quality, culturally responsive mental healthcare 
is particularly important. In your testimony, you spoke about 
how your institution was able to normalize discussions around 
mental health, and asking for help during the pandemic.
    Could you share with us how Federal COVID relief funding 
has helped you support student mental health on campus? Are 
there specific mental health programs or services that have 
been successful for your students, and what, if any additional 
support do you need moving forward to continue to address 
mental health challenges?
    Dr. Boham. Thank you, Representative Bowman, Madam Chair. 
Salish Kootenai College, like many Indian Reservations has 
underlying mental health issues, and we had them before the 
pandemic, but we did not have the resources to address them to 
the level we needed to. That resulted in a lot of suicide 
ideation, suicide attempts, suicide completions within our 
reservation community.
    In addition to students leaving school due to mental health 
issues. With the COVID funding we were able to increase face to 
face contracting for mental health services, but we also added 
tele-mental health, and that was probably one of the most 
significant things that we did.
    We did not know whether it was going to be widely received 
in our community, but it was. What we did was not only did we 
have the adequate access for those services for our students 
and their families, but also for our employees. We normalized 
the conversation, employees talked with students about yes, you 
know, why do you not call this number to talk about that. I 
called them last week.
    Those kinds of conversations, so that it did not make 
asking for help a stigma. Many times people want to not--they 
think they are the only one. I mean they know they are not the 
only one, but they do not want to be identified as the only 
one. As these conversations around support for mental health 
happened, we also saw requests for support in other ways as 
well.
    That approach to community support, community wellness, 
community mental health, cannot be underestimated in how it 
impacted our students.
    Mr. Bowman. Thank you for that. We have also heard a lot 
today about how TCUs were created for the purpose of preserving 
Native culture, language and traditions. As a former educator, 
I know how important it is to provide culturally responsive 
education that reflects values and protects the lived 
experiences and shared cultural heritages of all of our 
students, especially in the context of the U.S. government's 
history of systemic oppression, and forced assimilation of 
Native Americans through education systems.
    It is vital that institutions like yours are able to center 
tribal identity, history and culture in your work. President 
Boham, how does your institution's unique cultural heritage 
impact the way your institution operates? What effect does this 
have on curriculum design, student support, and family and 
community engagement overall?
    Dr. Boham. Thank you, Representative Bowman and Madam 
Chair. All of our courses integrate that cultural perspective, 
so I will give you a concrete example. In our tribal forestry 
and our natural resources programs, we teach forest management 
and natural resource management similarly to what you would get 
at any school for the nuts and bolts of the science.
    However, we also talk about the cultural significance of 
those natural resources. Sometimes we will forego the economic 
return on a stand of trees because they serve a larger cultural 
purpose. When we are learning everything here, it is always 
with that lens of how that fits into our cultural world view.
    What we know is that students who have a strong sense of 
their own identity, who feel connected to who they are and 
where they are from, they have much better persistence and 
completion rates than students who do not.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Dr. Boham, I am sorry to cut you off, 
but they have called votes, so we are going to try to get 
through a few more rounds of questions before we have to leave 
to go to the floor. Next, I recognize Mr. Comer from Kentucky 
for 5 minutes for your questions.
    Mr. Comer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Dr. Akers, when looking 
at the faulty budgeting from the Department of Education and 
the Congressional Budget Office, it is clear that the integrity 
of the Federal student loan portfolio is deteriorating rapidly. 
The President knows his radical policies could not pass through 
this Congress, so he is providing de facto free college through 
the student loan program.
    Dr. Akers, can you describe the harm of this 
administration's student loan policies that are being 
characterized as ``fixing a broken system,'' and the effect 
this could have on fueling further inflation?
    Dr. Akers. I have serious concerns about the act of a one-
time cancellation event of the type that has been hinted about 
coming from the White House soon. I am especially concerned 
about the incentives that it creates for future borrowers. If 
students are to believe that they do not have to repay the 
loans they take on today, it is very likely that they will be 
willing to pay more for college, borrow more for college.
    That reduces pressure on institutions to keep prices in 
line with value and allows for a continuance of the tuition 
inflation that we have seen over the past decades. The second 
concern I have about it is of course, the distribution of 
benefits. Generally, when we craft bail-out programs, we think 
of resources going to the people who need them the most.
    We know that the disproportionate amount of student debt is 
held by people in the top end of the income distribution. It is 
not a program that benefits the poor. I am deeply concerned 
about both the distribution of benefits of this sort of act, 
but also the changes and incentives that it creates for the 
future of the program, and what that does for the 
sustainability of our program.
    Mr. Comer. Well as Ranking Member of the House Oversight 
Committee, I have also been working to determine the extent to 
which this forgiveness proposal will benefit the very staffers 
President Biden has tasked with developing this radical policy.
    Dr. Akers, as a matter of sound governmental ethics, do you 
believe those staffers should be excluded from any student loan 
forgiveness proposals that they drafted?
    Dr. Akers. I think the legality of that sort of proposal is 
outside of the scope of my expertise, but I appreciate the 
concern about the potential conflict of interest.
    Mr. Comer. Right. In 2016, Buzz Feed News reported that 
just three out of 32 tribal colleges allowed their students to 
receive Federal loans. Today the most recent data from the 
Department of Education shows that only two tribal colleges 
allow their students to take out Federal student loans. In this 
article they assert TCUs fear students defaulting on their 
loans, while TCUs claim they recognize there are issues with 
Federal student loan programs, and want their students to find 
educational assistance elsewhere.
    Either way it seems TCUs recognize the ongoing failure of 
our Federal student loan program. Dr. Akers, knowing this, 
would students attending tribal colleges benefit from President 
Biden's rumored plan to cancel $10,000.00 in student loan debt?
    Dr. Akers. No, they would not, and potentially they would 
face higher prices at other institutions if they chose to 
attend those as a result of that sort of intervention.
    Mr. Comer. Dr. Akers, approximately how much debt do 
students from Ivy League schools, or other elite educational 
institutions hold?
    Dr. Akers. Ivy League students represent about 4 percent of 
borrowers, yet they hold 14 percent of the outstanding student 
loan volume, so they are disproportionately large participants 
in the Federal student loan program.
    Mr. Comer. Here we have a scenario where Ivy League 
graduates stand to win a windfall from all of Biden's student 
loan cancellations, while students at tribal colleges will get 
essentially nothing. Is that correct?
    Dr. Akers. That is correct.
    Mr. Comer. Wow. Madam Chair, that concludes my questions, 
but I would like to yield the balance of my time to Dr. Foxx.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Comer. Dr. Akers, I 
cannot overState how deeply concerned I am with the many 
reckless decisions the Biden administration is currently taking 
to bend the rules for loan and repayment programs. These 
actions are not getting the headline attention they deserve, 
and I am afraid there is little scrutiny on these misguided 
actions. I would like to run through a few of these with you, 
and get your expert opinion on their impact.
    Back in April the Department snuck in a vague announcement 
to provide borrowers what they call Operation Fresh Start. The 
only details they have provided is that they will eliminate the 
impact of delinquency and default, and allow borrowers to re-
enter repayment in good standing. Do you think it is wise for 
the Federal Government to essentially require the private 
sector to delete predictive information, such as credit history 
of borrowers, and what could be the negative effects of 
suppressing an individual borrower's credit history from other 
lenders, let us say when the borrowers want to buy a home, or 
the future?
    Dr. Akers. I think that would be very unwise. My concern 
would be for the student borrowers who have been successful in 
repaying their loans, who do not otherwise have a family 
history of credit. They have been building their credit score 
for the purpose of potentially buying a home, or even buying a 
car, or renting an apartment in some cases.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. I am sorry, the time has expired. Mr. 
Comer's time has expired. I now recognize Congressman Espaillat 
from New York for 5 minutes for your questions.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is the 
following, and it is to Ms. Presidents Lindquist, Carry Billy 
or Sandra Boham. Through the COVID-19 relief bill Congress has 
awarded TCUs more than $367 million in aid. What are some of 
the ways that TCUs have successfully implemented the relief 
funds? What would long-term investment mean for the students at 
TCUs? That is the first question.
    Ms. Lindquist.
    Ms. Billy. President Lindquist is not here today.
    Mr. Espaillat. Okay. If you could respond for her, please.
    Ms. Billy. Yes, this is Carrie Billy with AIHEC. I will 
quickly respond. One of the biggest things tribal colleges have 
done is provide the money in direct student aid--aid to the 
students, lowering tuition. Some are providing free tuition, or 
discounted tuition for students to help them and providing 
emergency aid across the board, but also addressing critical 
infrastructure needs that they have, HVAC systems.
    Tribal colleges have very old facilities, so trying as best 
as they can to upgrade them, so students feel safe in their 
environment.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you. Anybody else would like to weigh 
in as well?
    Dr. Boham. Representative Espaillat, what Salish Kootenai 
College has done is we have provided assistance to students. 
That is where a lot of our resources went. We also provided 
safety issues. We discovered we had no way to notify the public 
of the pandemic, or any safety measures, so we implemented a 
sign on our campus, so that we cannotify the community.
    Again, a lot of the supports around mental health and 
addressing mental health, food insecurity, housing insecurity, 
support for parents with children in supporting their children 
to go to childcare systems, and also reducing tuition, and so 
we did a 50 percent tuition reduction.
    We have very low tuition to begin with, but that little 
additional resource back to the students has helped them to 
again, address just their basic needs. The students are not 
looking to live very you know well here, but they need to have 
basic needs covered if they are going to focus on completing 
their degrees and plans of study.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you. Thank you. Like other students 
across the Nation, and many of TCU students had to suddenly 
transfer to online learning, which left many without access to 
resources like reliable internet and community support. How has 
the administration assisted the students with this transition, 
and how are you dealing with learning loss of some of the 
students throughout the pandemic, and beyond this?
    Ms. Billy. This is Carrie with AIHEC. I will answer the 
first part, and perhaps President Boham can answer the second. 
What tribal colleges did with a lot of their COVID relief 
funding, and working with their tribes, was try to build out 
the IT infrastructure that did not even exist. On most Indian 
Reservations, if you look at a Verizon or AT&T map, the empty 
spots on those maps are where Indian country is, what is left 
of Indian country.
    They tried to build them out. One perfect example is 
Nebraska Indian Community College partnering with their K-12 
schools to use a Spectrum license to provide free wireless 
internet access to the K-12 schools, their families, and the 
tribal colleges.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you. Ms. Boham, do you have any 
further input?
    Dr. Boham. Yes. We also used some of our COVID relief money 
to provide additional classroom support and tutorial support. 
We went from no online to completely online when the pandemic 
first hit. We have now transitioned back most fac-to-face, but 
we also have kept our hybrid, which is sort of a classroom like 
this.
    We still do not have a lot of asynchronous online courses 
because our students have indicated that's not their favorite, 
but we do have some. What we have done is what we always do, 
which is to try to meet the needs of our students as they are 
telling us what is the best way to serve them.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you. I now recognize Dr. Foxx, 
the ranking member of the full committee for 5 minutes for your 
questions.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chair. Dr. Akers, you were 
cutoff in answering the other question that I asked you. I have 
a followup about that issue that I think will get you back into 
it. As an economist, what could be the larger implications to 
the credit market and our economy if credit bureaus are forced 
to report factually incorrect information?
    Dr. Akers. Yes. If credit rating agencies were required to 
not use accurate information on loan repayment it would 
basically make loan repayment information no longer relevant to 
credit scores. People who have succeeded in making repayment 
would lose credit score that they have earned because of 
repayment. Essentially, it is a reduction in liquidity. It 
would be the overall result of this introduction or constraint 
on information into the credit rating system.
    Ms. Foxx. It appears to me that the Biden administration is 
missing no place at all to undermine our economy. My friends 
across the aisle continue to forget the important, historical 
context surrounding when public service loan forgiveness, or 
PSLF was first enacted in 2007. As you know, Dr. Akers, PSLF 
was written by Congress to be a narrowly targeted program 
before the full pivot to direct loans. When most borrowers had 
FELL loans, and when there were not as many income driven 
repayment plans. However, with the stroke of a pen the Biden 
administration has created a PSLF waiver, changing the 
requirements, and opening the flood gates of a program that has 
historically provided approximately $100,000 in debt 
forgiveness per borrower.
    Dr. Akers, if a borrower is receiving $100,000 in debt 
forgiveness, what type of borrowers is this most likely--you 
have alluded to it before, and is this type of borrower 
reflective of the average student loan borrower?
    Dr. Akers. It is very likely that a borrower with 
$100,000.00 in debt is someone with a graduate or professional 
degree. We know that the typical recipient of a bachelor's 
degree has only about $30,000 in debt. That is because that is 
the Federal limit on what they can borrow through the Federal 
loan program.
    Someone with $100,000 in debt is a very special borrower, 
very likely at the high end of the income distribution.
    Ms. Foxx. Right. What would make sense given that over a 
third of borrowers who had their loans canceled under PSLF are 
making over six figure salaries? Dr. Akers, a recent study 
published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found 
that the PSLF waiver allows for as many as 3.5 million 
borrowers holding as much as 145 billion eligible for immediate 
forgiveness.
    We now know that separately grad plus loan borrowing is 
leaving taxpayers on the hook for at least 6.4 billion in 
losses over the next decade. Given that 87 percent of PSLF 
borrowers hold graduate student debt, it appears that this 
program, and the issues with grad plus, are related.
    How is the lack of borrowing caps for graduate students in 
the large amounts of forgiveness provided by the Federal 
Government contributing to how institutions consider setting 
their prices? Especially as it pertains to borrowers in 
``public service programs or graduate borrowers?''
    Dr. Akers. There are many instances in which an individual 
student might anticipate that they will be going into public 
service after graduation from a graduate or professional 
degree. Since they are able to borrow without limit, they can 
borrow huge sums.
    If they understand the way that this program works, they 
could anticipate that they may not have to borrow--or repay 
many of the dollars that they are borrowing. This essentially 
allows people to borrow without consequence, which translates 
to a reduction in pressure on institutions to keep the price 
that they charge students in line with value because in 
essence, the students do not care what they are paying because 
they likely will not have to pay it back in the future.
    This is really stemming from both the generosity of the 
existing loan forgiveness programs, but also the fact that 
these graduate students are able to borrow essentially without 
limit.
    Ms. Foxx. We have no skin in the game for anyone except the 
taxpayers. The taxpayers are on the hook for paying off all 
these debts. The institution has no skin in the game. The 
student has no skin in the game, and what we wind up happening 
as someone said earlier I think, a back door way of providing 
free college. It is just what the Democrats want. Thank you, 
Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. I now recognize the chairman of the 
full committee, Mr. Scott from Virginia for 5 minutes for your 
questions.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Madam Chair. Comments have been made 
about transfers of wealth. I would note that two decades ago 
states were paying about two-thirds of the cost of college. 
Students had to pay one-third. That has eroded down to the 
states paying about one-third now, and two-thirds of the burden 
is on the student.
    Pell Grants for low-income students covered about 75, 
almost 80 percent, the cost of going to college. Now it is 
under 30 percent, and that has resulted in ballooning student 
loans to a point where 5 years ago it was about 1.5 trillion 
dollars. At that point the Republican planned for 1.5 trillion-
dollar tax cut, resulted in a tax cut where 80 percent of the 
benefits were scheduled to go to the top 1 percent in 
corporations.
    That is a transfer of wealth. Ms. Billy, did you mention a 
treaty obligation? Can you flesh that out a little bit? What 
are the treaty obligations?
    Ms. Billy. The treaty obligations between American Indian 
tribes and the Federal Government are just like the treaty 
obligations between the Federal Government and any other 
nation, because tribal nations are sovereign nations. They are 
treaty obligations. The treaties were signed in exchange for 
land. Over a billion acres of land was given to the Federal 
Government. A lot of that was given back to states as part of 
the land grant system.
    I mean that is where the treaty obligation comes from, to 
provide services to American Indian--federally recognized 
American Indian tribes.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. You mentioned a benefit to the local 
areas in terms of economic development. Some colleges just 
generally, are the economic engine in those areas. If the TCUs 
are in rural areas, I would imagine that they would be a major 
economic force in those areas. Is that not true?
    Ms. Billy. Yes. They are a significant economic force in 
their communities generating billions of dollars every year, 
and in terms of students who graduated and go to work in rural 
communities, and in their regions, and also providing research 
and other economic development, and also focusing on job 
creation, which is really the way to address generational 
unemployment to create new jobs, and that's what tribal 
colleges are focused on doing.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Dr. Boham, how would tribal colleges 
and universities benefit from teacher preparation programs such 
as the ones proposed in Augustus F. Hawkins Centers for 
Excellence?
    Dr. Boham. I am not sure that I know what the proposed 
education programs are.
    Mr. Scott. Would the teacher preparation programs--well let 
me just skip that.
    Dr. Boham. I can tell you though that our teachers that we 
are training stay in our communities and work with our 
students. They understand our students, and they are able to 
address the whole child. Not only their academics, but their 
social and emotional, and their identity and culture.
    As we create these teachers, and they go into our 
communities, we hope to continue to see the benefits of high 
school completion from our students, and then for them to also 
consider what their future will be.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Ms. Billy you indicated that there is 
a per student based on enrollment in a tribe, and that non-
enrolled students do not get that payment. Do the non-enrolled 
students pay a higher tuition at the tribal colleges?
    Ms. Billy. No. The tuition is the same at tribal colleges, 
whether you are an enrolled member in that tribe, or you are 
just a regular community member, the tuition is the same.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you. I now recognize 
Representative Good from Virginia for 5 minutes for your 
questions.
    Mr. Good. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Dr. Akers, the 
President is misusing his emergency powers to defer, or even 
transfer student loan debt and burden generations of Americans 
with higher taxes for years to come. As you know, according to 
the Federal Reserve, some 40 percent of the highest income 
households in the U.S., are the ones who hold nearly 60 percent 
of the outstanding student loan debt.
    The moratorium on student loan payments has already cost 
American taxpayers about 150 billion dollars, or the tune of 4 
billion dollars per month. My bill, the Federal Student Loan 
Integrity Act, which I led with my colleague on this committee, 
Jim Banks, would curb the authority of the Biden 
administration, to continue the student loan payment deferment.
    I hope next year, and I expect that next year we will have 
a Republican majority which will allow my bill to have a vote 
on the House floor to return some sanity to the situation. The 
Biden student loan scam is driving up the cost of education for 
America's lowest income earners, and tricking students into 
taking on more debt with the false impression--I hope it is the 
false impression, that they will never have to pay it back.
    Dr. Akers, who do you think should be required to pay a 
student's loans?
    Dr. Akers. I believe that students generally themselves 
should have to pay back the dollars that they borrow. I think 
there is a role for a safety net in our Federal loan system, 
but I think that the benefits, the relief, the bailouts, should 
be reserved for people who are the lowest income, and face, the 
actually a big struggle in having to pay back those loans.
    Mr. Good. Yes. I think it should indeed be the students. 
Who do you think it would be right to transfer that debt to? We 
hear this term forgiveness. Of course it would not be 
forgiveness, it would just be transferred. If a student can, or 
does not want to pay their debt back, who do you think that 
should be right for it to be transferred to?
    Dr. Akers. I do not think it should be transferred to 
anyone.
    Mr. Good. Yes. I continue to have to educate my colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle on basic economics. It cannot be 
forgiven it has to be transferred to someone if it is not paid 
for by the person who borrowed it. Do you think that someone 
that never went to college should be forced to pay someone 
else's student loan?
    Dr. Akers. No. I do not.
    Mr. Good. Yes, I agree with you. Do you think that someone 
who worked their way through school, so they did not have to 
incur student loans. They worked a couple of jobs, they worked 
summers, they worked during the school year so they could avoid 
student loan debt. Do you think they should be forced to pay 
with their tax dollars someone else's student loans?
    Dr. Akers. No. I do not.
    Mr. Good. Yes, I do not as well. Do you think someone who 
paid off their student loans after college, you know, they 
actually made their payments, and they paid off that student 
loan. Do you think they should be forced to pay someone else's 
student loans?
    Dr. Akers. No, I do not.
    Mr. Good. Well, I appreciate that. What do you believe 
would be the impact of transferring what is estimated 1.6 
trillion. 1.6 trillion outstanding debt estimated to be about 
$5,000 per American, with 300 million Americans, or some 
$15,000 per taxpaying household.
    What do you think the impact would be to transfer to 
taxpayers 1.6 trillion dollars' worth of student loan debt, 
which I doubt would poll very high. Say hey, do you want to pay 
$5,000 to pay off everybody's student loan debt per American? 
Or $15,000 for tax paying households?
    What do you think would be the economic impact? Also, what 
do you think it would do to college costs if we were to 
transfer all that debt to the taxpayers?
    Dr. Akers. Well, this is necessarily going to take 
resources away from Americans through other programs or 
ultimately drive a need for a tax increase to pay off any 
expense of this cancellation. My concern with how it affects 
higher education more narrowly, is of course that it allows 
students to be less sensitive to the prices they are paying 
because they do not expect that they will actually have to pay 
back any dollars that they borrow, and institutions will raise 
prices as a result.
    Mr. Good. I think you are exactly right. I have had young 
people ask me who have student loan debt, like I did when I was 
in my early 20's, and they say hey, should I make my payments? 
Am I being a chump if I make my payments? Are they going to 
turn around and forgive it? Am I foolish if I were to actually 
pay the student loans that I borrowed, that I chose so that I 
could go to college, so that I could have an opportunity to 
earn a higher income?
    Setting aside the moral question of you know transferring 
student loan debt to non-borrowing taxpayers, does it make 
practical or good financial sense to transfer this debt from 
those who owe it while we're continuing to make student loans?
    Dr. Akers. No. Absolutely not. Without deeper systemic 
reform to stop unaffordable loans from being made, we will 
continue to have pressure to have nonsensical interventions 
like widespread loan cancellation.
    Mr. Good. Well, thank you very much for answering my 
questions succinctly, and Mr. Chairman, I yield back my last 15 
seconds.
    Chairwoman Bonamici. Thank you, Representative. Because of 
the pending vote on the House floor, this committee is going to 
stand in recess, and reconvene about 5 minutes after the second 
vote is called. The committee currently stands in recess.
    [Recess.]
    Mr. Scott. The committee will come to order. We will now 
resume questioning with the gentlelady from Tennessee, Mrs. 
Harshbarger.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Scott. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 
and Ranking Member, and thank you to the witnesses here today. 
I would like to start with Dr. Akers. Doctor, in your testimony 
you noted that the financial risk associated with college is 
the single greatest impediment to our system of higher 
education.
    I agree, absolutely. Students have been told for far too 
long they need to take on thousands of dollars in debt to 
pursue a post-secondary credential, yet there is no guarantee 
that it will even pay off. Moreover, the financial risk lies 
solely on taxpayers and students because institutions with 
access to billions of Federal funds have no skin in the game 
when it comes to return on the education that they're 
responsible for providing.
    Do you believe that the lack of shared risk by colleges and 
universities results in misalignments between students and 
taxpayers and institutions? The second part of that question is 
what are the consequences of these misalignment incentives?
    Dr. Akers. I do believe that is a problem, and I am 
concerned about the lack of accountability for institutions to 
produce outcomes that students and taxpayers are actually 
looking for. Surveys indicate that over 90 percent of students 
go to college for the purpose of their economic advancement, to 
make more money to advance in their career.
    To the extent that institutions are not on the hook to 
provide that, they are letting down both students and 
taxpayers.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Absolutely. I will look at the graduation 
rates at 19 percent, and I looked at the total number of 
students that these tribal colleges you know have a cumulative, 
which is around 22,000 students. That brings me to another 
question Dr. Akers, you also mentioned that institutions that 
persistently failed to match the price they charge with 
potential earnings of their students, should not be allowed to 
continue their participation in Federal student loans, and that 
is--I 100 percent agree.
    Recently students have shown, and I think you may have said 
60 percent of master's programs failed to deliver a positive 
return on investment for their students, yet we have seen 
unfettered access to grad plus loans, which are now expected to 
cost taxpayers at least 6 billion dollars for new loans made 
over the next decade.
    What my question would be to you is what do you recommend 
Congress do in considering when it comes to reforming that grad 
plus or Stafford loan program for graduate students?
    Dr. Akers. I question whether there is really a need for 
Federal intervention in graduate student borrowing. At the 
onset of the student loan program, we were correcting for an 
absence of private sector capital being available for students. 
My belief is that if the Federal Government were to stop making 
graduate plus loans at the low interest rates that are 
available today, that the private sector would step in.
    Unlike the Federal Government, the private sector would 
underwrite these loans, meaning they would look at a student 
and assess what would be affordable for them to be able to 
repay, and would only lend that amount, which I think adds a 
layer of consumer protection for students that does not exist 
in the current system.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Absolutely. You know basic--depending 
upon what degree, and what the potential earnings are for that 
degree. I know that when I borrowed, and you know, you get a 
Pell Grant initially, but anything I borrowed I had to pay 
back, and based on the earnings of a pharmacist, I paid those 
loans back, every penny of them.
    The next question would be many higher education experts 
have suggested that the Federal incentives schools should be 
required to pay a fee equivalent to some share of the losses 
taxpayers pay based on the underperforming student loans. It is 
a good first step. What are your thoughts on such insurance 
proposals, and what are the benefits to students, institutions 
and taxpayers on the market based risk sharing approach like 
the insurance requirement?
    Dr. Akers. Sure. I think it is important that we get 
institutions to have skin in the game.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Dr. Akers. What matters is not how much the loans get 
repaid necessarily, but rather the total economic return that 
an institution is providing that is comparing the costs that 
students and taxpayers are paying to the return that comes in 
the form of heightened future wages, they increase contribution 
to taxes, things like that.
    I think moving in that direction would be a step in the 
right direction, both for individual students, and for 
taxpayers.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes. I totally agree, and I appreciate 
you taking the time to answer those questions, and we will 
followup with you on a couple other suggestions that you may 
have for us, you know, the education committee to go forward 
with this. I appreciate that, and thank you Mr. Chairman, and I 
yield back.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. The gentlelady's time has expired. 
The gentleman from New York, Mr. Jacobs, you are recognized for 
5 minutes.
    Mr. Jacobs. Thank you very much. Ms. Akers, I have a couple 
questions I would like to ask you. Again, thank you all for 
being here. Just a little followup on Congresswoman 
Harshbarger's question on degree insurance. We recently, the 
Republicans on this committee held a roundtable discussing the 
idea of degree insurance, a concept in which institutions take 
out insurance in the event that their graduates face lower than 
expected earnings, or are unable to pay back their loans.
    Basically, if the insurance would cover the difference 
between what they are making after they graduate, and what the 
average would be for that profession, that degree that they 
pursued for a 5-year period, and it was an interesting concept.
    I do not know if you looked into this. I know it is pretty 
recent as far as an industry, but if you want to elaborate a 
little more on what your thoughts are. I thought it was 
interesting, and one thing that it may incentivize a student, 
and we talked about this, that may be struggling in the second 
year and decides to drop out. Whether this may incentivize them 
to stay through and finish, because this at the end is 5-year 
guarantee that they would be able to have sustainable income.
    We know that most student loan problems arise when there is 
not a graduation at the end.
    Dr. Akers. Yes. Great question. I have followed this issue, 
and I am a big fan of the model of bringing private sector into 
higher education to provide some risk mitigation for students. 
When we think of education as an investment, the only challenge 
is that it is not a diversified investment.
    It would be like putting all of your money for your savings 
for retirement into a single stock. We do not really recommend 
that, yet we do so with education, and we do not offer any 
insurance to ensure that if it does not work out, that you are 
protected in some way.
    Degree insurance offers the same protection, something like 
an income share agreement would do as well. Basically, tying 
the amount that is obligated to pay on the back end to the 
amount that their education is actually worth, or in another 
way, maintaining that they will have a minimum level of income 
after they graduate, so basically taking out the bottom side 
risk of that investment.
    I think this is good for students. It protects them from 
that potential downside risk, makes the more low-income 
students, especially willing and able to invest in degrees that 
they otherwise would not be able to afford because of that 
downside risk. Potentially puts pressure on institutions to 
deliver the outcomes that it is their students are looking for 
in the terms of job placement, economic mobility, and higher 
wages.
    I am a fan of this model. I am looking forward to its 
further expansion.
    Mr. Jacobs. Thank you. I agree. It was an intriguing idea. 
When you mentioned you said a statement, pressure on 
institutions. I just want to hear your thoughts. Having talked 
to our local, one of our local community colleges, Erie 
Community College in the Buffalo area, I was amazed by the 
amount of children that go to those schools and maybe the 
entirety of their first semester will be in remedial courses 
because they received a diploma at their high school, but they 
did not--they need remedial education.
    They really were not, had not met the rigors that they 
needed. In that regard, they are burning up some of their 
student loans on having to pay for something they were supposed 
to learn in high school. Do you think there should be some 
accountability on those institutions? Some skin in the game if 
they do not do their job? Educate the kid that they are 
supposed to, that they give a diploma to?
    Dr. Akers. Sure. I am not an expert on K-12 education 
explicitly, but I do think that there are certainly failures in 
the K-12 system of education that are making it more 
challenging for postsecondary institutions to do the work that 
we are asking them to do.
    Mr. Jacobs. Thank you very much. I yield back.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. I am not aware of any----
    Ms. Billy. Mr. Chairman, I am sorry.
    Mr. Scott. Yes.
    Ms. Billy. Hi. Mr. Chairman this is Carrie Billy with 
AIHEC. I was wondering if I could respond to that.
    Mr. Scott. Please, please do.
    Ms. Billy. No. I just wanted to mention to the 
Representative well actually you cannot participate in Federal 
financial aid of any type until you are in the program, until 
you are in an academic program. If you are in completely 
remedial education, you are not participating at that time.
    There were several attacks against tribal colleges, or 
statements made about tribal colleges that frankly are not 
true. I would just like to address. First, the data that Ms. I 
believe Akers cited was--is IPED's data, which is not--as I am 
sure she knows, particularly relevant to tribal colleges, 
American Indians, or community colleges.
    We have our own data base where we collect information that 
is actually relevant to our institutions that more accurately 
tells their story, more completely. For example, part-time 
students often are not included. Tribal colleges offer a number 
of credential programs and certificate programs that also 
aren't captured. I mentioned earlier, tribal colleges are 
nation builders.
    If our Nation needs short-term certificates, that is what 
tribal colleges do. That is not captured in any of the data she 
cited. Our institutions are open door institutions, like 
community colleges, we serve any student who is in need. About 
60 percent of our students do test into developmental ed 
because of failed K-12 systems.
    We believe the comparison that is cited should be of 
students who are of the same caliber. It is very difficult to 
do at regional and other institutions because they mostly will 
not admit those students. They would just leave them out of the 
workforce entirely.
    Tribal colleges are addressing those kinds of students. 
Many of our students are first-generation. They have never had 
the opportunity to enter college before. They are first 
generation because until, I do not know--thirty, fourty, fifty 
years ago, American Indians were not even admitted to higher 
education, many could not even go. In this State, I am in 
Virginia right now, could not even go to college, to high 
school in this State.
    That is why tribal colleges were created as bridge 
institutions, and that is a function that they proudly continue 
to serve. Our tribal colleges are bridges to mainstream 
institutions. A student might come for a year and then transfer 
to a mainstream institution. That is also not captured in the 
data that Ms. Akers cited.
    If you ask any administrator at a mainstream regional 
institution and they will tell you that the most successful 
students, American Indian students, are the ones that attended 
a tribal college first.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you. Thank you. There appears to be no one 
else seeking recognition. I want to thank our witnesses for 
your time and testimony. Today we discussed the important role 
of tribal colleges and universities in strengthening Native 
communities and expanding access to higher education and 
propelling underserved students to the middle class and beyond.
    I am disappointed that my colleagues across the aisle 
decided to disregard the historic nature of the hearing, and 
instead tried to focus on student loan reforms, especially when 
we consider that only one TCU actually participates in the loan 
programs.
    I am also troubled that some of our colleagues have 
asserted that TCUs are not serving their students well, they 
criticized TCUs based on a flawed perception of the sector's 
outcomes and pointed to data indicating low graduation rates 
for that sector. However, what is not mentioned is how--and I 
think we just heard this at the end, TCUs provide access to 
educational opportunities to underserved students despite 
operating often under resource constraints.
    This is even more true for TCUs because unlike other land 
grant colleges and universities, State and local governments 
are not obligated to provide any funding support. Instead, TCUs 
are primarily supported by the Federal Government through the 
Higher Education Act, and Tribally Controlled College and 
Universities Assistance Act of 1978.
    I would like to urge all of our colleagues to consider how 
we can actually support these institutions in their vital work, 
and ensure that other institutions of higher learning can learn 
from their success. Unfortunately, as our witnesses have 
shared, TCUs are severely under resourced, forcing them to do a 
lot more with less.
    The pandemic only worsened the financial strain, so to help 
the TCUs recover from the pandemic, Congress delivered more 
than 367 million dollars in dedicated Federal COVID relief aid. 
However, we know that our work to support these institutions 
cannot end there.
    We must secure enhanced and sustained funding so the TCUs 
can continue educating generations to come. I look forward to 
working with our colleagues on this committee and relevant 
stakeholders to make sure that our TCUs and Native students 
succeed.
    I want to thank our witnesses again, and if there is no 
further business to come before the subcommittee, the 
subcommittee is now adjourned. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 12:29 p.m., the Subcommittee adjourned.]

    [Responses to questions submitted for the record by Carrie 
Billy follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    [Responses to questions submitted for the record by Dr. 
Cynthia Lindquist follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                 [all]