[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 50 (Thursday, March 22, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1935-S1936]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FOR-PROFIT COLLEGES
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it has been nearly 4 years since the
collapse of Corinthian Colleges and almost 2 years since the collapse
of ITT Tech, two of the largest college collapses in U.S. history.
These infamous companies left tens of thousands of students in the
lurch, interrupting their education and leaving them with worthless
credits and tons of debt.
Rather than being anomalies, these companies embodied the for-profit
college industry, an industry that enrolls only 9 percent of all
postsecondary students but accounts for 33 percent of all Federal
student loan defaults. The same predatory practices that took down
Corinthian and ITT Tech are commonplace throughout the for-profit
college industry, even today.
So this notion that some would have you believe--that, with
Corinthian and ITT Tech gone, this industry is magically cleaned up and
purged of bad actors--is nothing more than an attempt by the industry
to justify rolling back important consumer protections like the Gainful
Employment and Borrower Defense rules.
Case in point: Ashford University is owned by Bridgepoint Education.
This is a company that, from its very inception, has shown a
determination to work the system in order to profit.
It all began in 2005, when a group of investors bought a tiny
Catholic college in Iowa, which at the time had an enrollment of 312
students, but what came along with that small campus was the gold for
Ashford: regional accreditation. That accreditation opened the
company's coffers to millions in Federal student aid funds.
Since that time, Ashford has closed the Iowa campus and become an
online giant, enrolling more than 40,000 students across the country
and taking in almost $390 million in Federal title IV funds.
Boy, have Ashford executives and owners gotten rich. From 2014 to
2016, Bridgepoint's CEO, Andrew Clark, made more than $10 million in
total compensation.
Meanwhile, its students have been left buried in debt with worthless
diplomas that employers often don't recognize. According to a recent
Brookings study, as of 2014, Ashford student cumulatively owed almost
$6 billion in Federal student loan debt, making it one of eight for-
profit schools in the top 10 schools whose students owe the most
cumulative debt. Of the Ashford students who left in 2009, nearly half
had defaulted on their debt 5 years later.
Just like Corinthian and ITT Tech, Ashford has been the subject of
numerous Federal and State investigations and lawsuits.
Ashford is currently being investigated by State attorneys general in
Iowa, Massachusetts, New York, and North Carolina, as well as the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission and U.S. Department of Justice. The
California Attorney General is currently suing Ashford for ``defrauding
and deceiving students.''
In addition, in 2014, Ashford was forced to pay $7.25 million in a
settlement with the Iowa Attorney General for consumer fraud. Once
again, Ashford used false and misleading statements, as well as unfair
and high-pressure sales tactics to lure students into enrolling and
taking on debt.
Just last year, Ashford agreed to pay $30 million to the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau for deceptive acts and practices, including
misleading students about their student loan payments.
Also like Corinthian and ITT Tech, Ashford uses mandatory predispute
arbitration clauses to hide its misconduct and prevent students from
holding them accountable in court.
These clauses, often buried in stacks of enrollment documents that
students must sign in order to take classes, force students to give up
their right to sue the school of misconduct either as individuals or
part of a class. The practice is almost unheard of at public and
legitimate not-for-profit institutions, but is a hallmark of the for-
profit college industry.
Not only does the practice steer disputes into arbitration proceeding
where the deck is often stacked against the student, nondisclosure
agreements often prevent the alleged misconduct or the outcome of the
arbitration proceeding from becoming public. This hides misconduct from
regulators and accreditors, often allowing for-profit colleges like
Ashford to continue illegal practices for years without detection.
In addition to receiving millions of dollars in Department of
Education title IV funds, Ashford also heavily recruits veterans and
servicemembers who qualify for Department of Veterans Affairs G.I. bill
funds.
You see, for-profit colleges see veterans and servicemembers as gold.
Federal law prohibits for-profit colleges from receiving more than 90
percent of their revenue from Federal sources, but rather than counting
all taxpayer-funded education assistance programs, including VA G.I.
bill and Department of Defense tuition assistance, current law only
counts title IV funds as Federal revenue.
This means that by aggressively targeting and recruiting veterans and
servicemembers, for-profit colleges like Ashford can receive an
unlimited amount of their revenue straight from the Federal Treasury.
Marine veteran James Long found himself on the receiving end of that
aggressive recruiting. A few years ago, Bloomberg told his story:
His Humvee was struck by artillery shells in Iraq. He
suffered a severe brain injury. While recovering at Camp
Lejeune, he was visited by an Ashford recruiter who signed
him up for classes. But despite knowing he was enrolled, his
brain injury was so severe that he couldn't remember what
courses he was enrolled in.
The California Attorney General's complaint against Ashford includes
the stories of two other veterans.
First, an Army Reserve veteran referred to as P.M. was encouraged by
Ashford representatives to attend courses at a local community college
while taking classes at Ashford.
P.M. was told that, by attending a ground-based campus rather than
just Ashford's online classes, he would qualify for a higher monthly
housing allowance under the G.I. bill, and he could transfer his
community college credits toward his Ashford program. He was later
``alarmed'' to find that Ashford limited the number of credits he could
transfer and refused to recognize some of the courses he had previously
completed.
As a result, P.M. had to take additional courses at Ashford,
receiving the lower housing allowance rate, to make up for the lost
credits. He then ``fell behind on his rent, had to take on another job
to keep up with his bills, and his credit score suffered.'' In
addition, he wasted part of his limited G.I. bill education benefits on
courses that he could not put toward a degree.
Another veteran, ``P.J.,'' was told that Ashford would accept most of
the 140 credits he had earned at other institutions and could expect to
graduate within 18 months. He was also assured that he would be able to
transfer his Ashford credits to a community college.
[[Page S1936]]
After he had already enrolled and began taking classes at Ashford,
P.J. discovered that Ashford had accepted none of his credits from
other schools despite their promises. When he later tried to transfer
his Ashford credits to two other schools, he found that neither would
accept them.
This is how Ashford treats veterans.
In recent years, Ashford has taken in as much as $38 million in G.I.
bill funds and is currently engaged in a fight to maintain eligibility
to receive these funds in the future.
Here is what it boils down to: Ashford is not approved for G.I. bill
benefits by the California State Approving Agency, a requirement for it
to be eligible for G.I. bill funds nationwide. The company has spent
months on dubious legal action and other schemes to skirt Federal G.I.
bill eligibility requirements. The matter is now in court.
With its G.I. bill eligibility in doubt, Ashford announced in
November it would voluntarily suspend new enrollments of veterans using
G.I. bill funds. This would prevent new veterans from being put at risk
and additional taxpayer dollars being wasted should the company lose
eligibility.
As reported by The Chronicle of Higher Education, the company resumed
new G.I. bill enrollments in February and acknowledged on a call with
investors that the suspension had ``negatively impacted fourth-quarter
performance.'' That is right; the company made the blatant decision
that profits are more important than veterans.
Last week, Senator Hassan and I sent a letter to Bridgepoint's CEO,
Andrew Clark, expressing our outrage and calling on him to immediately
halt new enrollments until their G.I. bill eligibility is resolved with
the VA. If the company fails to do so, it will lay bare the true
disregard they have for the students, especially veterans, they claim
to serve.
Also last week, Bridgepoint announced that it is up to even more
shenanigans. It will attempt to separate from Ashford and another
school it owns to become an Online Program Management company while
Ashford seeks to become a not-for-profit college. If approved, this
complicated maneuver would mean that Ashford would no longer have to
abide by the Federal 90-10 rule or other accountability measures
focused on for-profit colleges.
At the same time, other for-profit conversions have been structured
in a way that their owners are still able to personally profit from the
new not-for-profit entity. It is the best of both worlds for owners and
investors; the school is able to shed Federal accountability
requirements while still profiting off of students and taxpayers.
I call on the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Education,
and Ashford's accreditor--the WASC Senior College and University
Commission--to carefully scrutinize this proposal in light of other
dubious for-profit conversions and Bridgepoint's own long record of
misconduct.
Despite the closure of Corinthian and ITT Tech, companies like
Ashford continue to exploit students and veterans while raking in
billions in Federal taxpayer dollars, using every possible scheme they
can think of to do it.
Until Secretary DeVos stops siding with her friends in the for-profit
college industry or Congress acts, students will continue to be harmed
and taxpayer dollars will continue to line the pockets of cheats and
crooks.
____________________