Obama’s courageous plan to steady the cost of college

During his State of the Union address last week, President Obama proposed a plan to slow increases in college tuition. His strategy calls for steering federal dollars to colleges that keep tuition low while cutting federal support to colleges that continuously raise price of attendance. Focusing on campus-based aid programs that go to university administrators instead of the much larger federal grants that go directly to students, Obama’s plan places the incentive to keep costs down squarely on the universities themselves, which ultimately have the power to prevent future increases in tuition.

In today’s challenging economy, such a proposal is necessary to prevent the transformation of college education into a privatized luxury available exclusively to the wealthy. The federal government’s present stance on federal aid allows colleges to decide for themselves where to place the burden of a slow economy. Instead of focusing on keeping the opportunity for attendance available for everyone, universities may decide to sacrifice lower-middle class aid for different improvements, like new facilities. Obama’s plan will still allow colleges and universities to grow, as long as every student has the opportunity to attend.

Obama’s proposition for reform succeeds in rightly making the affordability of college education a top priority. Universities are constantly faced with competing interests. Highly paid administrators do not want to lose their jobs, professors want more money for research, and students constantly demand more financial aid. The result is a confusion of priorities—in trying to please everyone, tuition slightly increases year after year, which eventually adds up to the monstrous amount that many college students, especially those at Georgetown, are forced to pay.

The president’s audacious plan empowers struggling schools to distinguish themselves against the colleges that do not make stabilizing education costs a priority. Forgoing tuition hikes for fear of losing federal aid both eases the financial burden on students and keeps college communities open to students who traditionally have not had access to institutions of higher education. A diverse student body not only provides for a more cognizant group of learners, but also allows for a more educated U.S. workforce, which, of course, is imperative for future economic growth.

This education reform also distinguishes sustainable and non-sustainable institutions of higher education. Those schools unable to operate annually without regular annual tuition increases will have to either find alternative means of funding, or shut down. These closures will, in turn, allow the federal government to invest its time and money pragmatically to nurture colleges that demonstrate they truly have the potential to grow.

Along with his plan to incentivize tuition stabilization, Obama’s proposal includes other much-needed improvements, including a requirement to publish information on the true price of attendance, graduation rates, average student debt, and employment rates after graduation. These stats would allow high school graduates and their families to make the most informed decisions on their college futures.

Furthermore, the foundation of Obama’s plan rests on the principal of cooperation and compromise. The administration will not be able to help colleges that are unwilling to help themselves by stabilizing or decreasing tuition. Backlash from House Republicans against Obama’s liberal approach to educational reform also presents an opportunity for the President to bring media attention to a national problem that has long been left unaddressed—the affordability of education.