All Sections
Welcome guest, you have 2 views left. | Register | Sign In


College costs: Obama's top-down plan


President Obama on Thursday announced his plan to make college in America more affordable. Naturally, it involved a complicated evaluation system by which federal bureaucrats would rate college “perfomance” and reward higher-ranking institutions with more taxpayer money — because if any institution can be trusted to reduce costs and improve accountability, it’s the federal bureaucracy.

Obama would have colleges measured on such critera as how many students graduate on time, how much debt they have when they graduate, and how many find employment. He acknowledged that colleges game existing ranking systems. Obviously, colleges will game these rankings too.

They will admit more students who receive grants and fewer who receive loans. They will boost the ranks of finance and business majors and reduce the ranks of liberal arts majors. They will not have to actually cut costs to do well on many of the criteria.

In his speech, Obama hit on the real problem. “It is time to stop subsidizing schools that are not producing good results,” he said. But his sentence could have ended after “schools.” As in health care, the big problem is that someone else pays for far too much of the costs, making students and families less sensitive to prices. Obama’s plan will do nothing about this third-party payer problem. It therefore will do just what he said it would not do: tinker around the edges rather than provide a fundamental change.


Comments


To improve the chance of seeing your comment posted here or published in the New Hampshire Union Leader:

  • Identify yourself. Accounts using fake or incomplete names are suspended regardless of the quality of posts.
  • Say something new, stay on topic, keep it short.
  • Links to outside URLs are discouraged, if used they should be on topic.
  • Avoid comments in bad taste, write well, avoid using all capital letters
  • Don't cite facts about individuals or businesses without providing a means to verify the claim
  • If you see an objectionable comment please click the "Report Abuse" button and be sure to tell us why.

Note: Comments are the opinion of the respective poster and not of the publisher.

Be the first to comment.

Post a comment


You must sign in before you can post comments. If you are experiencing issues with your account please e-mail abuse@unionleader.com.



More Editorials

Crisis management: Jindal, Bush shine, unnoticed

   7   Editorials PUBLISHED - 5:44 pm 8/29  

A driving warning: Book-learning and book-throwing

   0   Editorials PUBLISHED - 5:44 pm 8/29  

An addict -- And an inspiration

   0   Editorials PUBLISHED - 5:44 pm 8/29  

Parks problem: 'Emergency' funding for leaf peepers

   5   Editorials PUBLISHED - 8:39 pm 8/27  

Gun violence up? No, it's been falling for decades

   23   Editorials PUBLISHED - 8:39 pm 8/27  

A bad indicator: City gets a spending warning

   39   Editorials PUBLISHED - 9:27 pm 8/26  

On guns: Bernie is better

   50   Editorials PUBLISHED - 9:27 pm 8/26  

Manchester rising: National recognition helps

   4   Editorials PUBLISHED - 9:22 pm 8/25  

Not so E-ZPass: DOT needs to step it up

   6   Editorials PUBLISHED - 9:22 pm 8/25  

Good lesson learned: See something, say something

   4   Editorials PUBLISHED - 7:58 pm 8/24  


NH Angle - Editorials