The decision by the United States Supreme Court to deny President Biden’s debt relief for the 43 million college and university student borrowers puts the nation in the grips of dilemma. This is reflected in the latest ABC poll that has 43 percent supporting the initiative, 42 percent against and 14 percent that do not know.
The dilemma precipitated by the Court includes having many former students continue to put their lives on hold until they can manage a solution knowing that a debt is a debt and paying it is the right thing to do. The dilemma also takes us back to the welfare state created to help the poor navigate their socio-economic condition that was largely abolished during the Clinton years largely because of the “handout” image associated with the programs
At the same time, the rapidly increasing costs of study at public colleges and universities caused by the great increases in tuition and fees resulted in increased debt.
The beginning of my educational experience predates the dilemma as there was little to support attendance at a college other than personal desire and family resources. I found that out when I returned home from military service.
I began by working nights cleaning offices and attending the University of Denver (DU) during the day until I found out from a fellow student that I could attend the University of Northern Colorado (UNC) for a whole year for the same tuition I was paying at DU for a quarter. I quickly applied for admission and registered at UNC for Fall classes.
Working all night and driving to UNC for day classes lasted a short time before I fell asleep on my way back, hit a bridge and ended in the river.
The UNC leadership was supportive but could only find a lender that could help the following quarter.
That little bit of assistance helped me settle, work and study in Greeley. Later, after graduate work at the University of Kansas, I went into college teaching and found that there was an abundance of financial aid programs available to students.
That abundance is coming due for payment now. Liberal borrowing especially from federally guaranteed sources along with the rapid rise in the cost of study has created a ballooning debt.
The question in the minds of many is, “How does the federal government help ameliorate this obstacle to normalizing life without it appearing to be a “handout?” On the other hand, one can also ask, “what has been the role of lack of public support for higher in helping to create unmanageable student debt?”
Those are the questions that appear to split American thinking about higher education. The Supreme Court has avoided the issue by prohibiting the President from dealing with the problem in his manner at the same time that it does not provide a road map to a solution.
I finished my graduate education with a debt of $11,000. I found out that I could have half of the debt forgiven if I taught for at least 5 years.
The teaching profession was a priority for the nation at the time. The resulting generation of a 50 percent discount on my debt can be offered as an excellent model for what we may want to do with student debt today.
We need to feel that we are not giving a “handout.” We also need to provide for institutional justice.
The views expressed by David Conde are not necessarily the views of LaVozColorado. Comments and responses may be directed to News@lavozcolorado.com.
