Why Some Lawmakers Want Colleges to Share Responsibility for Student Debt
A new proposal from House Republicans is sparking heated debates in higher education circles. The idea? Make colleges and universities partially liable when their graduates default on federal student loans. While the concept of holding institutions accountable for unpaid debt isn’t entirely new, this latest push raises big questions about how it would work, who it would affect, and whether it could actually solve America’s $1.7 trillion student debt crisis. Let’s unpack the details.
The Basics: What’s Being Proposed?
The draft legislation, part of a broader Republican effort to overhaul higher education policy, would require schools to repay a percentage of defaulted loans taken out by their students. The exact formula isn’t finalized, but early discussions suggest institutions could be on the hook for up to 10% of unpaid balances if their graduates’ loan defaults exceed certain thresholds.
Proponents argue this would incentivize colleges to prioritize programs with strong career outcomes and discourage them from enrolling students in degrees unlikely to lead to well-paying jobs. “If schools have skin in the game, they’ll think twice about saddling students with debt for programs that don’t deliver,” said one GOP staffer familiar with the proposal.
How Would It Work in Practice?
The plan would likely involve a risk-sharing model. Here’s a simplified example: If a college’s alumni default on $10 million in federal loans over a set period, the institution might have to repay $1 million (10%) to the government. Schools exceeding a predefined default rate—say, 15% of borrowers failing to repay—could face escalating penalties.
Crucially, the rules would apply only to federal student loans, not private ones. And while all institutions receiving federal aid would be subject to the policy, exemptions might exist for schools serving large numbers of low-income students, such as community colleges or historically Black universities.
This isn’t the first time risk-sharing has been floated. The Obama administration experimented with a similar concept in 2016, targeting career-training programs with high debt-to-earnings ratios. More recently, bipartisan Senate proposals have suggested tying loan forgiveness to institutional performance. But the House GOP’s version goes further by making repayment obligations universal across most degree programs.
The Case For Accountability
Supporters of the plan point to glaring inequities in the current system. For-profit colleges, which account for nearly 40% of federal loan defaults despite enrolling just 8% of students, have long been criticized for aggressive recruitment tactics and low graduation rates. Under this proposal, such institutions would face immediate financial pressure to improve outcomes or risk closure.
Even traditional universities aren’t immune to scrutiny. A 2023 study found that graduates of certain liberal arts programs at non-elite schools often earn less than high school diploma holders, yet still owe tens of thousands in student debt. “Colleges shouldn’t be allowed to profit from federal loans while ignoring whether their degrees translate to economic mobility,” argues economist Marshall Steinbaum.
There’s also a fairness argument: Taxpayers currently foot the bill when loans go unpaid. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that federal student loans will cost the government $265 billion over the next decade due to defaults and income-driven repayment plans. Shifting some of that burden to institutions, supporters say, creates a more equitable system.
Pushback From Critics
Unsurprisingly, colleges and universities are pushing back hard. The American Council on Education warns that the policy could have “disastrous unintended consequences,” such as:
1. Reduced Access for Vulnerable Students
Schools might become risk-averse, rejecting applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds who are statistically more likely to struggle with repayment.
2. Program Cuts in High-Need Fields
Lower-paying but socially critical careers (e.g., teaching, social work) could disappear from curricula if colleges deem them too financially risky.
3. Tuition Hikes
Institutions could raise tuition to offset potential penalty costs, worsening the debt crisis.
Community colleges are particularly alarmed. “Our students often borrow less but face systemic barriers to repayment,” says Dr. Jill Biden, a longtime community college professor. “Punishing schools for societal inequities misses the point.”
Even some fiscal conservatives are skeptical. The Heritage Foundation has criticized the plan as “government overreach,” arguing that market forces—not federal mandates—should determine which colleges survive.
Alternative Solutions in the Mix
While the House GOP proposal dominates headlines, other ideas for addressing student debt are gaining traction:
– Income Share Agreements (ISAs)
Students pay a percentage of future earnings instead of taking loans. Purdue University’s ISA program, launched in 2016, has shown promising results.
– Expanded Pell Grants
Increasing need-based grants reduces reliance on loans. The Biden administration recently expanded Pell eligibility to incarcerated individuals.
– Employer Partnerships
Companies like Amazon and Walmart now cover tuition for employees, creating debt-free pathways to degrees.
The Road Ahead
The House GOP’s proposal faces steep odds in the Democrat-controlled Senate, but it signals a growing bipartisan appetite to rethink how higher education is funded. As Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), chair of the House Education Committee, recently stated: “The status quo is failing students and taxpayers alike. Every stakeholder, including colleges, needs to be part of the solution.”
What’s clear is that any sustainable fix must balance accountability with accessibility. Whether risk-sharing models strike that balance—or simply shuffle the deck in a broken system—remains to be seen. For now, students, families, and educators are left navigating an uncertain landscape where the rules of the game may soon change dramatically.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Why Some Lawmakers Want Colleges to Share Responsibility for Student Debt