Advertisement

News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education

Preemptive Strike on Student Loans

When a House of Representatives panel holds its much-awaited hearing today on the ever-expanding student loan investigation, the spotlight will be on the sole witness, New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, whose inquiry into the relationships between colleges and lenders has propelled the issue onto the front pages of newspapers and to the forefront of Washington’s higher education policy scene.

But an undercurrent is sure to be the charge, given voice increasingly by leaders in the Democratically controlled Congress, that the Bush administration’s lack of oversight of the student loan industry has been at least partially responsible for allowing the current situation to develop.

Tuesday, the U.S. Education Department sought to take the latest in a series of preemptive strikes designed to persuade lawmakers that its officials are dealing with the perceived problems. It didn’t really work.

Education Secretary Margaret Spellings announced Tuesday that she had formed a special internal panel to consider possible regulatory and policy changes related to the government’s student loan programs, building on the work of a federal negotiating committee whose months of work ended in deadlock last week.

Spellings said the new panel, which would be made up of officials from across the department, would make recommendations on some of the issues the negotiating panel wrestled with – such as possible restrictions on colleges’ lists of preferred lenders and on the providing of gifts and other possible “inducements” from lenders to college officials — that have been at the core of the emerging scandal that Cuomo has helped fuel.

The secretary said the panel would also help decide what the department should do with the National Student Loan Data System, to which Spellings temporarily restricted lender access last week amid findings that some lenders had inappropriately mined it for information about student borrowers to help them market their products.

Department officials have been buffeted by accusations not only of individual wrongdoing by a top overseer of the student loan programs but, more generally, charges that the administration has contributed to the emergence of the scandal by engaging in relatively minimal oversight of the loan programs in recent years. Department officials rebuffed Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) when he made such charges last week, and sought in Tuesday’s announcement about the new task force to reassure lawmakers that the department is on the case. “Secretary Spellings looks forward to continuing to work with Congress to focus efforts not only on regulation and oversight of the financial aid system but to engage in a national effort to reform and restructure the entire system,” the statement said.

But Miller, who heads the committee that will play host to Cuomo today in a hearing entitled “Examining Unethical Practices in the Student Loan Industry,” didn’t exactly embrace the department’s announcement or buy its argument.

Noting that Cuomo and other state attorneys general were “taking aggressive action to end the corrupt practices and other abuses that have been undermining the federal college loan programs and harming students, parents, and taxpayers,” Miller said: “We should be grateful to the attorneys general for their efforts, especially because the federal Education Department has been missing in action.”

Miller said he hoped the task force would provide useful information, but said Spellings “must do more than just create this task force.” He urged the secretary to adopt several steps that he called for her to enact last week, adding, “We cannot rely upon state law enforcement officials to keep doing the work of the federal Education Department.”

Expect to hear much more of the same at Wednesday’s hearing.

Financial Aid Group Contemplates Changes

Also on Tuesday, officials of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators said that they were contemplating significant changes both in the group’s own policies and in the guidance it gives its members – campus student aid officers – about their dealings with lenders and the loan programs.

The association has come under heavy criticism from critics of the loan industry for having done too little to discourage some of the disputed practices, for its harsh criticism of Cuomo’s efforts, and for the heavy financial support it receives from student loan companies. (Some of the association’s members, though, have praised it for defending them against what they see as broad-brush criticism of their profession.)

Officials of the financial aid association circulated a resolution that its board had adopted at a meeting last weekend in which the group said it would develop a code of conduct for financial aid officials and consider whether the association itself should stop accepting sponsorships and contributions from lenders.

The resolution said the association should promptly:

  • Develop and promulgate its own code of conduct that will provide student financial aid administrators and their institutions with explicit guidance in carrying out the expectations of the NASFAA Statement of Ethical Principles.
  • Review the association’s relationships with student loan providers, other entities, and organizations and “take all such measures as may be necessary to modify its policies and practices to ensure that the association itself is in total and complete compliance with its Statement of Ethical Principles so that the association will continue to set the highest standards of ethical behavior and conduct its affairs in a manner that is free of any conflicts of interest or the perception thereof.”
  • Establish a mechanism to inform, educate and advise financial aid administrators on complying with the NASFAA Code of Conduct.
  • Call on NASFAA members to undertake a review of his or her current practices and those of his or her institution to ensure that “all financial aid decisions, particularly those involving educational loans, are free of any bias, actual or perceived conflicts of interest, and are based solely on the best interests of students and parents.”

NASFAA officials characterized as mistaken news reports that its board had already decided to stop accepting such funds.

Also on Tuesday, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), the other major player (with Miller and Cuomo) in what has become the student loan inquiry triad, sent a letter to college presidents in which he urged them to examine the student loan policies on their campuses and avoid the “disturbing practices” that have come to light.

Doug Lederman

Got something to say?


Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Advertisement

Comments

ho hum

When Dallas beheld the benign landscape of a lender-enablers, toothless regulators, and a pliant membership, he could wax indignant about nosey AGs besmirching the integrity of the profession. Alas, those times are gone, and the response to his shoot-from-the-hip jabs at Cuomo should have been a bracing wake-up call.

Instead, NASFAA will now draft its own code of conduct, review relationships, ask its membership to do its own soul-searching, and blah blah blah.

The aid community and students are not served by these half-measures. The ground is shifting beneath our feet, and NASFAA, like it or not, is our only real shot at explaining to the folks that control the pursestrings what the real story is in financial aid.

I seriously doubt that NASFAA will do anything except enter damage control mode to protect its own, after throwing a few bodies to the wolves. Unfortunately, this means we’ll have to live with the legislative consequences.

We should be explaining (now, while we have the public’s attention) how to make college more affordable to more students. Instead, we are distracted by the media themes of bad schools doing bad deals with bad lenders. (We better address this too, but’s it’s just a sideshow to the serious structural problems with the program.)

The INEVITABLE changes in the status quo will be informed by our contributions as aid professionals. Either we give an honest appraisal of the problems, so our lawmakers can address them more effectively, or we fume about no one understanding this complicated business, try to protect our own bits of turf, and let the lawmakers change the law without our input. I’ll bet we’re all going to really like that result.

Either way, friends, the punch bowl has officially been taken away.

finaidfollies, at 8:15 am EDT on April 25, 2007

Care to Identify Yourself?

I would happily take “finaidfollies” comments more seriously if he/she chose not to hide behind a veil of anonymity. If you want more transparency in higher education, start at Square One.

David Gelinas, Past National Chair at NASFAA, at 11:20 am EDT on April 25, 2007

RE: The Infamous Student Loan

Just another slap on the hand for what should be considered capital crime.

Further, I want to emphasize the peril of continuing to avoid the REAL issue, that being, more affordability & accessibility for students and accountability for schools and lenders. Secretary Spellings was on the right track, but if this latest revelation regarding kick backs from the lenders is virgin news to her and her panel(s) of experts, then we’re in more trouble than I thought.

Hopefully, someday, priorties will fall into place and those in power will realize they are skewing the numbers that represent the future of our nation.

Revoking access to NSLDS does more harm to the student than the lender. The student is already kept in the dark about the status of their federal debt, their best shot at assistance was speak to a true advocate for the student to decipher the information reported on NSLDS and then guide them in the most efficient management of their current debt as well as guiding them in procurement of funds to cover the balance of their education. The optimum term here is “true advocate for the student". Far too many people in the student loan industry are only advocates unto themselves.

The entire student loan industry has been so concerned about monies to be made on the backside of these loans, that those who had an opportunity to lead the student in the beginning, in essence, set the student up for failure in order to fill the lender’s pocket.

It’s sad when the money mongers in the student loan industry, celebrate a student’s graduation, more than the student and their family.

Bobbie J McClure, Director at Financial Aid 101, Inc., at 12:05 pm EDT on April 25, 2007

Spellings, the interior decorator

I highly doubt that congressional investigators will by fooled by Spellings’ ploy. If she was really interested in reform, she would appoint an independent outside panel to review the issue and then publicly release their findings.

The fact that she’s formed a group made up of very people who are part of the problem shows that this is only window dressing.

Shameful, but obvious.

Thom, at 12:30 pm EDT on April 25, 2007

fair request, but no can do

Mr. Galinas’ request is fair, but unfortunately I cannot comply. I think everyone in financial aid will agree that there are some employers who do not encourage or even tolerate candid discussion.

As far as taking me ’seriously’ goes, it’s obvious that Mr. Galinas does, since he seeks to discredit my comments solely because they are anonymous. I would happily take Mr. Galinas’ comments more seriously if he chose to comment on the substance of my posts, which he is free to do at any time.

Besides, I’m not the only one ‘hiding’ in these comments. Not everyone who comments chooses to divulge their real name—why is Mr. Galinas singling me out? Because I disagree with the received wisdom? This isn’t quite the same as shooting the messenger, but is still something akin.

finaidfollies, at 1:20 pm EDT on April 25, 2007

Lenders (at least smaller ones — effect)

Bobby J you say that “students will be more effected by the NSLDS shutdown than the lenders". While I agree this has a very negative impact on the students — let me give you the impact from the lender side.

We are a very small lender group that is mostly foucsed on Federal consolidation and private loans. Without access to NSLDS, our model is not viable, period. Without any guidance from the ED as to when (or even if) access will be restored, I will be forced to suspend our activities. This is ‘real terms’ means laying off about 40 employees. It means the investments I made just 1 week before the shutdown (which I never would have had I known this was coming), are all for naught and has a significant impact on me personally.

So I appreciate your comment, students will surely be impacted, but some lenders (maybe not Sallie Mae and Citi) are HUGELY effected! And their employees and employees families even more so.

Very concerned small lender, President, at 1:55 pm EDT on April 25, 2007

apologies for misspelling

I misspelled Mr. Gelinas’ name in error. No disrespect was intended.

finaidfollies, at 1:55 pm EDT on April 25, 2007

IS THE PROBLEM FIXED IS THE QUESTION

Ok, lets review.

1.Take away the revenue lenders receive from the federal government on Stafford Loans. ? Did this reduce the amount of loan the student will borrow on their education?

2.Remove all lender list. ? Did it reduce the amount of loan the student will borrow on their education?

3.Turn loans over to 100% DL.? Did it reduce the amount of loan the student will borrow?

If you answer NO to all 3 questions, then what the heck is going on here?

On the first question if you take away the subsidy that the fed pays the lenders, then stop charging the lenders the millions of dollars that you charge to partake in the program. How is the government going to make up for all that money once it is gone by removing the lenders?Anyone thought of that?

If you remove lender list from schools, you will have DTC lenders pop up from out of India to solicit to students and it will be a schools nightmare to manage.

Then if you turn all loans over to DL as the feds lose all the money they are getting from lenders for the program, or if they get into a budget crisis, what do you think will be the first area cut? Education. It is cut into everytime already.

All our efforts here will not change one thing when it comes to student borrowing and will only make a more complex financial aid system even more messy.

Finaidfolli I am going to bet you are a DL school. Seems DL folks have a lot to say about a ffel problem.You have been mislead and deceived into this stinking thinking about ffel.However,do your students write a big fat check for the difference in cost at your school after they have used all their DL eligibility or are one of those terrible lenders helping them fulfil their education? If it werent for those horrible lenders, you wouldn’t even have a job my friend so you need to think about that.

One more thought, for all the DL fans out there, as you brag about not using lender list on your campus, have you disclosed to your students that the reason you don’t is because you don’t allow them the choice of a lender? You force them into a loan that is the most costly to them and the least beneficial. Talk about being deceiving.Why isn’t anyone saying anything about that?Why is it National headlines that schools are using certain lenders and pushing all students to those lenders but not one word is being said about DL not even putting a choice of a lender in front of their students.Grad students are getting the biggest raw end of the deal with thousands of dollars being taken from their loan funds by the federal government to subsidize their loan while at a ffel school that same Grad student the lender would have paid that on their behalf. NO ONE IS TELLING THAT SIDE OF THE STORY. Why is the question.

One more thing, kick backs? If a school is getting a revenue share from a lender require them to put that back into scholarship dollars for the student. Problem solved. Now a student or two will have to take out less loan money.

If you use a lender list, disclose why and what the benefits are with those lenders and what they are offering. However leave the option of using a different lender if they want. Disclosure. Problem solved and student will know exactly what their savings will be in the end.

If you want to be a DL school, disclose why you are and also you should have to let students have a choice there too. Why should you be able to force your students into one lender but cry foul if anyone else does it? Once again Disclosure.

Fix the problems and stop wasting tax payers money on all this stupid political grandstanding.

DJ, at 10:45 am EDT on April 26, 2007

Comment to DJ

I’ll briefly reiterate a previous post: I work at a DL school but all of my students can choose to go FFEL; I don’t care. In fact, I sit everyone down individually and explain the differences between DL vs FFEL program and for kids I got from FFEL schools ask about who their lender was— they don’t know... I’m not dealing with stupid kids either. I’m batting 100% DL still after 9 years for the simple reason: you may think students want to save a quarter but when you ask them to rank interest rate, length of repayment or ease of use (1 lender/1 payment) they all decide the same way and it’s not the rate— it’s the 1 lender 1 payment. Can we give them what they really want and not what we think they want? All you need to do is talk to them to verify my point and most schools simply don’t. As they are graduating my school (avg of $160,000) and going on to borrow more at another school they are annoyed when it’s not a DL school... They don’t want another lender.

Finally it’s nice to read someone else thinking NASFAA needs to take a big old step back and shut up.

Ann Doherty, at 9:55 pm EDT on May 4, 2007

Advertisement

 Jobs Related to Preemptive Strike on Student Loans

or search for jobs directly.

Director of Financial Aid
Burlington County College

Responsible for the management of the financial aid office, the delivery of student aid funds to eligible students, and the ... see job

Director of Financial Aid
Concorde Career Colleges, Inc.

Use your special gifts, embrace your passions and achieve the happiness you are destined for with a career at Concorde Career ... see job

Campus Director of Financial Aid — 155606
Miami Dade College

Job Description: The Campus Director of Financial Aid is responsible for the direction and coordination of all activities ... see job

Financial Aid Officer
Concorde Career Colleges, Inc.

Description Our work environment is dynamic. Our people are valued. A rewarding career awaits you at Concorde! Concorde ... see job

Associate Director of Financial Aid — Operations
Community College of Philadelphia

Explore the Path to Possibilities at Community College of Philadelphia, the largest public institution of higher education in ... see job

Campus Director of Financial Aid and Registration — 239105
Miami Dade College

Job Description: The Campus Director of Financial Aid and Registration is responsible for the direction and coordination of ... see job

Director, Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF)
Burlington County College

The Director of EOF is responsible for meeting the needs of students as they relate to their educational planning and goals; ... see job

Director, Student Finance
DeVry University

A GREAT JOB IN A GROWING CAMPUS: DeVRY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK Director, Student Finance see job

Associate Dean of Financial Aid
City College of San Francisco

Posting Number: 0080043 Filing Deadline (All postings close at 4:00 PM): 01-16-2009 Job Type: Administrative — Associate Dean ... see job

Director of Student Financial Services — 047106
Miami Dade College

Job Description: The Director of Student Financial Services is responsible and accountable for development, maintenance and ... see job