[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.

                          ____________________