[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 31 (Wednesday, March 12, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2206-S2207]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DODD:

  S. 426. A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to adjust 
the needs analysis to protect more of a student's earnings; to the 
Committee on Labor and Human Resources.


       THE BETTER FINANCIAL AID FOR WORKING STUDENTS ACT OF 1997

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise here this morning to introduce a 
piece of legislation which I have entitled the Better Financial Aid for 
Working Students Act of 1997. At the appropriate time here, Mr. 
President, I will send the bill to the desk and ask that it be referred 
to the appropriate committee. But let me take a few minutes, if I can, 
to explain what I am trying to do with this proposal.
  This legislation is designed, Mr. President, to assist America's 
working students to cope with the growing financial burdens of a 
college education. One hardly even needs to use the words ``growing 
financial burden.'' It is to state the obvious.
  There is not a family in America that does not have children in 
school or going on to college or who have already been there that does 
not appreciate what a significant burden the cost of a higher education 
is in our country.
  For the parents of college-aged children, of course, this is a trying 
time of year, not only for the parents, but for those who are 
anticipating going on to higher education. These parents and students 
are today anxiously awaiting the acceptance letters or rejection 
letters from our Nation's colleges and universities around the country.
  However, for the vast majority of families, beyond waiting for an 
acceptance or rejection letter in March and April from institutions 
they have applied to, the biggest concern is not whether they are going 
to get into college or into a community college or into a university; 
the biggest question, the biggest challenge facing these families is: 
How are we going to pay for this? If they get in, how are we possibly 
going to finance this incredible burden that we see increasing all the 
time?
  In fact, Mr. President, I think this week or maybe the past week one 
of our national magazines--I believe it was Time magazine--has a 
special issue out on the cost of higher education. It is their cover 
story. I commend them for it. I believe it was Time, I apologize if it 
was another periodical. But it is at an appropriate point with these 
acceptance and rejection letters coming to seniors in high school and 
others who have been out of school for some time but anxious to get 
back in.
  So I am stating again the obvious. This is a time of some anxiety. 
But I would argue, the greatest anxiety is not ``whether or not I'm 
going to be able to go on to a higher educational opportunity,'' but 
rather, ``How am I possibly going to afford this? How are we going to 
afford this so our children or myself will be able to acquire the 
skills and educational levels that are going to be necessary for us to 
succeed or for my children to succeed in the future?''
  That is why the letter they await, Mr. President, with the most 
anxiety, of course, is the financial aid letter. Working families 
understand as well as anyone that a college education has never been 
more important than it is today.
  Thirty years ago, Mr. President, a high school diploma could get you 
a

[[Page S2207]]

good job, not the best job, but you would get a good job. You could 
raise a family. You could buy a home. You could have a good life, 
retire with a decent level of financial security.
  I suspect that the Presiding Officer, his family, my family, 
certainly we saw that in case after case in our communities, whether it 
was Arkansas or Connecticut. Today, both of us understand that whether 
it is Arkansas or Connecticut, that is just not the case any longer.
  Even though you need a high school diploma today, you have to have 
even more education if you are going to fit into the economy of the 
21st century. Presently, the mean income of a high school graduate in 
the United States is $18,700 a year; that's the mean income. That would 
be barely enough to sustain a working family. In fact, if you have a 
family of four, $18,700 just doesn't do it today; I don't care where 
you live in the United States. But with a bachelor's degree, earnings 
nearly double, to $32,600 a year. So that additional 4 years can make a 
fantastic and huge difference in an individual's ability to provide for 
themselves and their families.
  As you might anticipate, Mr. President, the higher the education, the 
greater the financial benefits. On average, a holder of a professional 
degree earns more than $74,500 a year. But making the college 
opportunity a reality for our children, and for those adults who are 
going on to higher education, is important beyond simply individual 
earnings. That is obviously a benefit. But beyond the dollars and 
cents, beyond the ability of individuals to earn a higher salary, there 
are benefits to the economy as a whole. According to a new Wall Street 
Journal survey, Mr. President, two-thirds of academic economists agree 
that the right Government policies in education would provide a needed 
shot in the arm to the American economy. The fact is, in today's global 
economy, higher education is vital if we are to maintain our 
international competitiveness and to keep our economy strong.
  Since the passage of the GI bill, Mr. President--which millions of 
Americans are familiar with--there may be those who are retired today 
who remember, after coming out of World War II or the Korean conflict, 
what a difference the GI bill meant to them. There was a significant 
debate that many may recall about whether or not we could afford to pay 
for the GI bill.
  I think in today's dollars, Mr. President, the GI bill--if we tried 
to adopt something like it today, in 1997--would amount to about $9,000 
for every single student who took advantage of it. Obviously, the bulk 
of them took advantage of it in the late forties and fifties, the 
generation that came out of World War II and Korea. But can you imagine 
that, today, if you and I were to stand on the floor of the U.S. Senate 
and be advocates for something like $9,000 for every eligible person 
who wanted to go on to a higher education? There is no way in the world 
we could pass anything like that--not to mention finding the resources 
to pay for it.
  So it was a remarkable accomplishment, with all the debt we had at 
the end of World War II and Korea that hadn't been paid off at that 
particular time. There was a collective understanding of the value to 
the country beyond the individual benefit of having a generation that 
could never, ever have thought about affording a higher education. We, 
as a country, at the national level, said, let's see if we can't come 
up and find some resources to help these people who could not afford to 
go on to school, so they have the resources to do it. I think it is 
fascinating to note the analysis of how that has worked out. There was 
an analysis not long ago, Mr. President, that said that, for every 
dollar spent on the GI bill, the Nation reaped a benefit of $7 in 
additional revenues--a 7-to-1 ratio. So as expensive as it was, our 
country as a whole benefited tremendously beyond the obvious individual 
benefits that those men--primarily men, but men and women--who were 
recipients of the GI bill received. The country as a whole was a 
tremendous beneficiary of that program.
  At any rate, from this very first effort in higher education--on to 
policies today--the hallmark of the Federal Government's role in 
education is not to set aside the curricula in our higher education 
institutions, or be involved in the workings of these institutions; our 
role is to try and come up with creative ways to help students and 
families afford the financial burden of a higher education.

  Today, Mr. President, student assistance is determined by a 
complicated analysis of family and student assets and earnings. I am 
destined to make my colleagues' eyes glaze over if I try to explain it 
on the Senate floor, but suffice it to say, it is a rather significant 
morass of various loans, grants, and other forms of assistance. 
However, what must remain crystal clear is that, for millions of 
Americans, college is not simply a time of tranquil learning and 
weekend parties or weekend gatherings on campuses. For many college 
students today, Mr. President--if not most--full and part-time work is 
a fundamental part of their college education.
  This bill that I am introducing this morning would help protect these 
students and ensure that when considering students' financial needs, 
work is rewarding. Today, Mr. President, under current law, $1,750 of a 
student's earning from work is shielded when determining need for 
financial aid. Beyond that initial $1,750, students' earnings are 
assessed at a rate of 50 percent.
  The proposal I have for us to consider would double that amount, from 
$1,750 to $3,500, which we would shield, so those students would not 
have to allocate 50 percent of every dollar over $1,750 to their higher 
education. It would establish a graduated assessment, from $3,500 to 
$5,000, which would be assessed at 35 percent, and anything over $5,000 
in earnings would be assessed at the 50 percent that today is assessed 
at $1,750. I don't know exactly when, Mr. President, the $1,750 was set 
aside. It may have been when the number of students that were actually 
working to pay for their education was relatively small and that work 
may have been something that people did to acquire some independent 
financial means to take care of their daily needs.
  But as I would say again, no matter where you live in the country, 
most of our students today are on loans and are out working. College 
isn't a 4-year deal where you go straight through anymore. You have to 
have some work experience. This would allow them--since many are paying 
their own rent, buying their own food, paying for their own 
transportation--by raising the $1,750 to $3,500, graduated up to 
$5,000, this would allow them to retain more of that income that they 
need for their legitimate expenses, before assessing it at a high level 
that would deprive them of that ability.
  Again, this is not going to be a panacea for everything students 
need, but I think it is realistic. We are going to consider major 
reforms in the Higher Education Act. I anticipate and hope that this 
bill might be a part of that proposal. This legislation would ensure 
that the efforts of these families will be rewarded; work would be 
rewarded and encouraged. However, this effort should not stand alone, 
Mr. President. Clearly, there are other groups who may require changes, 
and other groups of legislation that may require changes. Specifically, 
I think we need to be sure that single students--particularly those 
with children--are not penalized because they are forced to work in 
order to pay for their education.
  The bill I am introducing today is, I think, an important first step. 
In my view, it will guarantee that low-income students receive the 
financial aid they so urgently need. I look forward to working on this 
legislation with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle here. I put 
it out for people's consideration. They may have some ideas to moderate 
it one way or another.
  Again, I think that given the common interest and common concern 
about higher education and how we can at least lighten the burdens of 
those out there trying to get that education and also holding down 
jobs, I encourage my colleagues' attention to this proposal.
  With that, I send the bill to the desk and ask that it be referred to 
the appropriate committee.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be referred to the appropriate 
committee.
                                 ______