[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 23 (Thursday, February 6, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S814-S815]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HIGHER EDUCATION
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, earlier this week I spoke to the
National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. I ask
unanimous consent that a copy of my remarks be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record as follows:
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
A few weeks ago, the National Conference of State
Legislators gave me an award--for defending the 10th
Amendment. It's the first time in ten years they were able to
give that award. There hasn't been much protection of the
10th Amendment going on in Washington. As grateful as I am
for both awards, the award that I am working even harder to
earn is one for deregulating and simplifying the federal role
in higher education.
If I were to earn that, it would be the first time in
American history that honor had been bestowed. Truth is, for
a long time it wasn't needed.
The federal government didn't begin to focus on colleges
and universities--almost all of them private at the time--
until 1862 when President Lincoln signed the Morrill Act.
That Act provided each state with 30,000 acres of federal
land for each member in their congressional delegation.
States were then required to sell the land and use the
proceeds to fund public colleges that focused on agriculture,
engineering, and military science. States were expected to
contribute to the maintenance of its land-grant institution
as well as to provide its buildings. But Congress was
otherwise sparse on advice for how to establish these
institutions and there was little federal intervention.
The federal government didn't focus much more on higher
education again until 1944, when Congress passed the G.I.
Bill. This included federal financial assistance to help any
veteran who served at least 90 days between December 1941 and
1946 pay for college or vocational training programs at the
public or private institution of their choice. This even
included high schools. The big news here was not just the new
federal money, but the way it was spent. Instead of
establishing a Washington program for colleges serving the
needs of veterans, the federal money followed veterans to the
college of their choice.
Not all of the independent private colleges thought this
was such a good idea. The president of the University of
Chicago said the G.I. Bill would turn universities into an
``educational hobo jungle.''
The only limitation on choice of institution for those
using the G.I. Bill was that it had to be approved by the
appropriate state educational agency or by the Administrator
of the Veterans Administration.
So you see, the dreaded ``voucher,'' which raises the
hackles of the K-12 establishment, was the very foundation of
federal funding for colleges and universities for seventy
years.
Last week I introduced a bill to give federal money to
elementary and secondary students in the same way we do with
the G.I. Bill, Pell Grants and student loans--let the money
follow students to the schools they choose. If you just take
41 percent of the federal dollars we are already spending on
K-12 education, you can turn that into $2,100 scholarships
for 21 million low-income children.
But as you can imagine, these Pell Grants for Kids created
an uproar from the K-12 establishment. My response was, if
vouchers helped created the best system of colleges in the
world, why don't we try it for our schools?
But back to the history of federal involvement in higher
education.
After the G.I. Bill, the number of Americans enrolled in
college more than doubled in just six years between 1943 and
1949.
Then came the Korean G.I. Bill in 1952.
And this brought more federal regulation. The Korean G.I.
Bill specified that institutions of higher education needed
to be accredited by a federally recognized accreditor in
order for a veteran student to use their benefits.
Still it was not much regulation. Only a single page of
paper.
By the way, in 1952, roughly 35 percent of students were
graduating from high school and only 6 percent were
completing college.
Now move ahead to Sputnik in the late 1950s. Congress
passed the National Defense Education Act that created the
first federal loan program in order for students to attend
college. Between 1952 and 1965, college enrollment increased
from more than 2.1 million to nearly 6 million (almost 30
percent of the 18-24-year-old population).
Still, after 100 years of federal involvement, there were
not many rules and regulations.
This brings us to 1965 and the passage of the Higher
Education Act.
Now here is the problem. Congress has reauthorized the
Higher Education Act eight times since 1965. With each
reauthorization came many well-intentioned good ideas and
another stack of additional regulations. The laws and
regulations have piled so high since 1965 that I voted
against the 2008 reauthorization because the stack of
regulations was as tall as I was then and I believed that a
new bill would eventually double that stack.
Here is a concrete example of unnecessary complication in
the higher education system: the application for federal aid.
It is a ten-page document that asks more than 100 questions
and is accompanied by a 72-page instruction booklet.
This is considered a victory in Washington. I know that
when I came here 11 years ago, I was determined to simplify
this application
[[Page S815]]
form. So were many other senators. And this is the result.
Despite well-meaning intentions over the years, our system
has become too complicated and burdensome. It wastes time and
dollars that ought to be spent helping students.
So today, I am here to ask for your help. I want to reverse
this trend of piling on layer after layer.
To begin with, I have asked my staff to consider drafting a
new Higher Education Act from scratch. Start all over.
Include everything that needs to be included and consider new
regulations that need to be written. This is not an
ideological exercise. It is an effort to clean out the
clutter. Call it a long-delayed spring cleaning.
The Senate education committee has begun to hold hearings
on the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.
Chairman Harkin and I have worked closely together on these
hearings and the chairman has been very thoughtful in how we
are approaching them.
At a recent financial aid hearing, here is what the
witnesses told us and they all told us the same thing:
o The application for a Pell Grant could be reduced to a
post-card by collecting only income and family size
o The federal aid system should consist of one grant, one
loan, and one tax credit
o Students should know how much the federal government will
invest in them in their junior year of high school
o We can use social media to reach those in middle school
about potential aid opportunities
We were told that these four big ideas would:
o Save money
o Reduce regulation
o Increase access for low-income, disadvantaged students
To take these ideas and others and put them into law, I
have created a Task Force on Government Regulation of Higher
Education.
I am joined in this by Senator Mikulski, Senator Burr, and
Senator Bennet; Brit Kirwan of the University of Maryland
System and Nick Zeppos of Vanderbilt University have agreed
to co-chair this task force. And 14 other college presidents,
university system heads, and other leaders representing all
sectors in higher education will work with the American
Council on Education to:
o Identify duplicative or unnecessary regulations
o Determine the cost of complying with federal regulation
o And offer suggestions for improving the current structure
of regulating.
Other members of NAICU serving on this panel include:
o Hartwick College (which has done tremendous work in this
area already)
o Tennessee Independent Colleges and Universities
Association
o Colorado Christian University
o American University
o Hiram College.
In addition, Congress has provided $1 million to the
National Research Council to conduct a study on
overregulation of higher education funding for which I have
fought since the last reauthorization of the Higher Education
Act in 2008.
So we have a bipartisan group of senators and a task force
which has its first meeting next week and a National Research
Council $1 million study to help us doour job.
But we need one more thing: your help.
Ronald Reagan once said that the eight most dangerous words
were: ``I'm from Washington and I'm here to help.''
Well, I'm from Tennessee. So, while I may be here in
Washington, I am here instead to ask for YOUR help.
The task force needs to hear specific examples of rules and
regulations that are no longer needed, overly burdensome,
costly, and confusing.
I would suggest that you do it in the easiest, most
specific and practical way. Start with the easiest thing that
will make the most difference and save the most money and
time that would be better spent on students, and make that
first. And the next one, second. In every case, make it as
specific as possible. You're the experts. You know what's
happening at your institutions.
Send your specific recommendations to this organization
(NAICU), my staff, and directly to Chancellor Zeppos.
But I would also like to recommend that you share these
with your home state senators and representatives.
Now sometimes I've said that you don't need to come to
Washington, and sometimes I get in trouble for saying that,
but it's true. In fact, it's better if you see them at home.
Think about it. Here they've all flown to Washington, they
think the plane flight somehow made them smarter, they're
away from their grounding, and they're busy. They have lots
to do here.
Now, you all have flown up here and spent a lot of money to
get here, and you're doing the right thing--that's a good
thing, it's helpful, it's appreciated, it's important.
But let me tell you something that's more important. Take
ten people from your congressional district and ask to see
your congressman or congresswoman at his or her district
office. Or go see your senator in his state office. You'll
have more to say, it will cost you a lot less to travel,
they'll have more time to hear you, and it will make a much
bigger difference.
Visit them at home!
Tell them that you are forwarding a list of duplicative,
unnecessary rules and regulations affecting higher education
that you have identified for elimination.
Explain to them the importance on institutional autonomy,
the accreditation process and the marketplace that produces
competition allowing students to choose schools and why this
has helped to create the best system of higher education in
the world.
They will have questions, and they are entitled to have
questions. Last year Congress appropriated $33 billion in
taxpayer dollars for Pell Grants, more than $100 billion in
loans and $38 billion for university-sponsored research.
We'll need allies to make progress, and if you tell your
elected representatives what you are doing and exactly how to
deregulate higher education, I bet they will listen.
Let me give you an example of why this is worth your time,
the story behind the America COMPETES legislation.
In 2005, I was sitting at a Senate Budget Committee hearing
and I was worried about how all the Medicaid and Medicare
spending was going to squeeze out investments in education.
So, that afternoon, I walked over to the National Academy of
Sciences and said, ``I believe if you'll tell Congress 10
things in priority order that Congress would need to do in
order to help make us more competitive in the world, I
believe Congress would do it.''
The Academy created a very good group led by Norm Augustine
of Lockheed Martin and produced a report called ``Rising
Above the Gathering Storm.'' It had 20 specific suggestions
in priority order--Congress enacted about 2/3 of them, and
within 4 to 5 years, funded most of them.
In other words, the point I'm trying to get across here is
that most ideas in Washington fail for lack of the specific
idea.
You'll be surprised that the more specific you are, the
more likely things are to get done.
Now, I am among the converted.
I believe we have the best system of colleges and
universities in the world.
Despite that, you will hear me urging you to focus on
worker training, to stop this business of shutting down such
valuable assets during the summer, and to confront disturbing
political correctness.
In the history of the world, universities have changed less
than any other institution. But in the Internet age, they
will need to change more. You need to learn from the same
lesson that applied to the American automobile companies in
the 1960s and 1970s which nearly led to their demise.
So my mission today is to deregulate and simplify the
federal role in higher education. To do this, I need your
help. First, to suggest concrete examples of overregulation.
Second, to remind your elected representatives of the
importance of autonomy and the marketplace that has created
the best higher education system in the world.
And if all of that effort earns the award for deregulation
and simplification of higher education, I will gladly share
it with each of you.
____________________