Americans
in
general
and
college
students
in
particular
are
showing
concern
about
the
rising
college
student
loan
debt
burden
and the
growing
possibility
that
students
will
have
difficulty
borrowing
funds
this
fall.
While
the
immediate
causes
of the
loan
crisis
are
discussed
later in
this
essay,
it is
important
to state
upfront
that the
real
culprit
has been
the long
run
explosion
in
college
costs –
not just
to
students,
but to
society
at
large.
If
college
costs
had not
risen
sharply
faster
than the
rate of
inflation,
there
would be
no
student
loan
crisis
today,
since
borrowing
would
have
been
very
small.
The cost
explosion
is the
result
of a
variety
of
factors,
such as
third
party
payments
that
reduce
student
sensitivity
to
costs,
the
non-profit
nature
of most
colleges
(which
reduce
incentives
to be
efficient),
and the
lack of
good
information
on the
outcomes
of
college
students,
making
it
virtually
impossible
to
measure
college
productivity.
As the
cost of
providing
higher
education
has
exploded,
real
state
government
appropriations
per
student
has
remained
relatively
constant
over
long
time
periods,
forcing
public
universities
to
depend
on
tuition
more
than in
the
past. It
is worth
noting,
however,
that
tuition
fees
have
also
exploded
at
private
schools
which
are
largely
unsubsidized
by state
government.
This
increased
reliance
on
tuition
fees
(especially
at
public
universities)
means
that
today
the
typical
high
school
graduate
does not
have
enough
money to
pay
hefty
tuition
charges.
The
solution
has been
to
borrow,
much of
it
through
federally
subsidized
loan
programs.
Seventy
percent
of all
federal
aid to
students
is in
the form
of
loans,
with
many
states
and
private
lenders
offering
them as
well.
The
College
Board
estimates
that
students
and
parents
borrowed
$78
billion
for the
2006-07
school
year
(double
the
amount
of a
decade
earlier),
of which
almost
$60
billion
was
borrowed
either
directly
from the
federal
government
in the
Federal
Direct
Student
Loan
Program
(FDSLP),
or
through
another
of its
programs,
the
Federal
Family
Education
Loan
Program
(FFELP).
With the
exception
of
students,
who were
piling
up more
and more
debt as
tuition
rates
continued
to
increase,
everybody
(i.e.,
lenders,
colleges,
politicians)
was
happy --
until
last
fall,
that is,
when two
events
conspired
to
derail
the
whole
show.
The
first
was the
crisis
that
spooked
financial
markets.
Until
recently,
investors
were
willing
to buy
packages
of
student
loans
from
lenders.
After
getting
burned
by
foreclosures
from
mortgage
lending,
however,
investors
have
become
wary
about
making
such
purchases,
reducing
funds
available
for
loans by
big
lenders
such as
Sallie
Mae.
To make
matters
worse,
Congress
passed
legislation
that cut
both the
interest
rates
that
lenders
could
charge,
as well
as the
fees
that
they
received
for
originating
a loan.
The cuts
were so
drastic
that a
third of
lenders
stopped
making
loans
altogether,
and
Sallie
Mae, the
largest
lender,
started
losing
money on
every
loan
that it
made.
The
implications
of this
can be
seen by
looking
at
Stafford
loans,
which
make up
most of
the
federal
loans.
Essentially,
the
FFELP
program
(where
students
borrow
money
from
private
lenders)
was
being
destroyed,
which
left
FDSLP
(where
students
borrow
directly
from the
government)
to pick
up the
slack.
But
FDSLP
was
ill-prepared
for the
task.
In
2006-07,
it made
only 20%
of loans
compared
to 80%
for
FFELP,
and
would
have to
come up
with
around
$40
billion
more
just to
replace
the
Stafford
loans
that
previously
went
through
FFELP.
To try
and
entice
lenders
they
have
driven
out of
the
FFELP
program,
the
government
now
wants to
buy
loans
from
lenders.
A Wall
Street
Journal
editorial
summed
it up
nicely:
“Congress
mandated
a return
on
student
loans
that is
too low
to
attract
private
capital
in the
current
market.
So
Congress
will now
use your
money to
create
artificial
investor
demand.”
It seems
clear
that
changes
need to
be made,
but it
is
equally
clear
that a
return
to the
status
quo is
not
acceptable
either.
The
Project
on
Student
Debt
reports
that by
the time
they
graduate,
students
owe
$21,100
in loans
on
average.
We have
estimated
that for
the
first
time,
the
average
debt of
students
exceeds
50% of
the
median
income
of
recent
college
graduates.
This is
up from
less
than 35%
as
recently
as
2000.
This
much
debt
cripples
the
financial
future
of many
students,
who are
increasingly
postponing
traditional
milestones
of
adulthood
such as
marriage,
purchasing
a home,
and
having
children.
Someone
once
said,
“When we
see the
light at
the end
of the
tunnel,
the
government
goes and
adds
more
tunnel.”
That
seems to
be the
case
here.
One
partially
governmental
created
“crisis”
(the
mortgage
problem)
led to a
second
problem
(in
student
lending),
which is
being
corrected
by
further
inefficient
taxpayer
bailouts.
Perhaps
it is
the time
to
restore
our
faith in
the
power of
markets,
not
governments,
in
lending.
Above
all,
however,
we must
stop the
major
long-term
problem:
excessively
rising
college
costs.
This
requires
a
fundamental
change
in the
way we
deliver
higher
education
services
in the
United
States.
We must
revise
the
nature
and
magnitude
of third
party
payments
by
governments
(perhaps
by
moving
to
subsidizing
students,
not
institutions),
encourage
new
for-profit
entrepreneurial
ventures,
provide
consumers
with
information
on how
colleges
spend
money
and what
students
learn,
etc.
Colleges
are
organized
and run
today
the same
way they
were a
century
ago –
and
arguably
no more
efficiently.
That
needs to
change.
--###--
Richard
Vedder
is the
Director
of the
Center
for
College
Affordability
and
Productivity
and
Andrew
Gillen
is its
research
director.
Dr.
Vedder
is also
a
Visiting
Scholar,
American
Enterprise
Institute,
and
Distinguished
Professor
of
Economics
Ohio
University,
while
Mr.
Gillen
is a
doctoral
student
in
economics
at
Florida
State
University.