As you have probably heard by now, the “credit crunch” has been making the student loan market less lucrative for many lenders, and has caused a bit of a controversy in the world of higher education.
To recap – lenders are trying to argue that problems in the credit markets will lead to a crisis for students who need loans to attend school, while most othersthink that the affects for most students will be small. Congress and the Education Department have created new policies to make sure that, no matter what happens, students will be able to access financial aid, but lenders, who already receive government subsidies to make loans to students, keep pushing to get a sweeter deal for their bottom line (as opposed to sweeter deals for students or taxpayers).
I thought this new article in the Chronicle of Higher Education might help point to the difference between planning for the worst (good), and unnecessarily wasting taxpayer money (not so good):
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
Posts
!
