Latest news with #SaraRobertson
Boston Globe
9 hours ago
- Health
- Boston Globe
Trump budget's caps on grad school loans could worsen doctor shortage
Four years of medical education costs $286,454 at a public school, on average, and $390,848 at a private one, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. Medical school graduates leave with an average debt of $212,341, the association found. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The price of a four-year program in osteopathic medicine is $297,881 at a public school, on average, and $371,403 at a private school, according to the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine. The average indebtedness of their graduates is $259,196. Advertisement The proposed loan caps 'will either push students and families into the private loan market, where they take on more risk and have less consumer protection, or simply push people out of higher education altogether,' said Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director at the Student Borrower Protection Center, a nonprofit advocacy group. Private student loans are also not eligible for Public Service Loan Forgiveness programs, which many students rely on to manage their debt. Students from low-income families may have difficulty qualifying for private loans. Advertisement In a letter to congressional leaders, the American Medical Association asked lawmakers to carve out exceptions in the law for medical education, saying that the current bill would deter good candidates from applying to medical school, discourage physicians from working in underserved areas, and make medical school unaffordable for all but the very wealthy. Critics said it could also drive more doctors away from lower-paying primary care fields, an area of acute need, and into more lucrative specialties. Conservatives have argued for decades that the availability of federal student loans allowed tuition costs to balloon — a proposition rejected by the Association of American Medical Colleges, which instead blames the rising cost of living. Studies examining the relationship between loans and tuition have varied in their conclusions. Sara Robertson, press secretary for Republicans on the House Education and Workforce Committee, said the proposed loan limits 'will drive down the cost of medical school and thus reduce the need for students to borrow in the first place.' She said private lenders would offer students lower interest rates than the government's Grad PLUS program would. The private market, though, has shrunk markedly since the Great Recession, according to Lesley Turner, an associate professor of public policy at the University of Chicago and an author of an unpublished paper that linked loans to rising tuition. In an email, Turner said it wasn't clear that 'the same level of nonfederal funding would be available today.' Because of inflation, she noted, the $150,000 limit for medical students is 'substantially reducing the amount these students can borrow, even compared to the status quo before the Grad PLUS program.' The program was started in 2006. Advertisement Robertson said schools could also help close the gap. 'Nothing in the bill prevents colleges from providing additional financial aid to low-income students pursuing medical school,' she said. That is not an option for schools of osteopathic medicine, most of which are private and not attached to universities with foundations, and which currently enroll almost one-third of the nation's future doctors, said David Bergman, senior vice president of government relations and health affairs for the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine. And many academic medical centers, which have lost millions of dollars in research grants abruptly pulled by the Trump administration, are facing severe financial strain. A vast majority of medical students rely on loans, not just those from low-income backgrounds, Bergman noted. Ending federal involvement in administering and subsidizing student loans was one of the goals laid out in Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's conservative blueprint for overhauling the government. It argued that leaving student loans to private lenders and ending federal loan forgiveness programs would 'allow for market prices and signals to influence educational borrowing.' Trump's policy bill would allow medical residents to defer not only their loan payments but also the interest on those payments, a provision that many medical professionals have supported. But the legislation would prohibit residents from counting those low-paid years of training as public service, limiting their eligibility for a popular loan forgiveness program that encourages young doctors to work in underserved areas. As a result, 'access to much-needed medical care for patients in rural and underserved communities will be diminished,' the American Medical Association's CEO, Dr. James Madara, wrote in the letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, and House Democratic leader Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York. Advertisement The changes will disproportionately affect low-income students with backgrounds that are underrepresented in medicine, who may face more difficulty obtaining private loans, said Dr. Virginia Caine, president of the National Medical Association, which represents Black physicians and which advocates for health equity. In turn, she said, it will limit those students' ability to return to serve in their communities. By 2037, the United States is expected to face a shortage of 187,130 physicians, including 87,150 primary care physicians such as internists and pediatricians who play a pivotal role in the early detection and management of chronic disease, according to the federal Health Resources and Services Administration. (There are currently 933,788 professionally active physicians.) About 75 million Americans live in areas where it is difficult to get access to primary care. The ratio of primary care providers is projected to decline to 76.8 per 100,000 people by 2037, from 81.6 per 100,000 in 2022. This article originally appeared in
Miami Herald
14-05-2025
- Business
- Miami Herald
College costs would soar for some low-income students under Republican bill
Nearly 4.5 million low-income college students would lose some or all of their federal financial aid if Republicans in the House get their way. That's according to an analysis from the left-leaning Center for American Progress, shared exclusively with The Hechinger Report. The report looks at the ways a GOP House budget bill would affect Pell Grants, the federal financial aid program that covers college expenses for students from low-income families. The changes, which would take effect this July, would reduce aid for students who do not take a full load of 15 credits per semester, typically five classes. That would be a departure from how things are now: Under current rules, students can be eligible for the maximum Pell Grant of $7,395 if they take at least 12 credits, or four classes. For students who take fewer credits, the money is prorated based on the number of courses in which they're enrolled. The proposal - which passed out of the House Education and Workforce Committee earlier this month on a party-line vote and will be considered as part of the larger reconciliation bill meant to fast-track the budget process - would eliminate Pell Grants for anyone taking fewer than eight credits each semester. Supporters of the bill say it would encourage students to take more classes and graduate more quickly. "We don't want students to take classes just to take classes, we want them to get credentials to signal their skills in the workplace," Sara Robertson, press secretary for the Republican majority on the House Education and Workforce Committee, wrote in an email. "Completion rates are already abysmal for Pell students. That is not the kind of 'access' we want." About 53 percent of Pell recipients who attend four-year colleges earn a degree, compared with 73 percent of their peers. But student advocates worry it could set in motion a downward spiral for many low-income students, forcing them to work more hours to cover tuition and living costs and making it harder to keep up with their classes. Others may need to take on additional loans. In all, critics say the changes would punish students who already struggle to maintain their course load. Related: Interested in more news about colleges and universities? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter. Sara Partridge, author of the Center for American Progress report and the group's associate director of higher education, called the proposal an example of "legislation without an eye to the realities of today's students." "A majority of them work," she said. "Many of them have child care, other caregiving responsibilities, and it isn't necessarily feasible for every student to take on more coursework per semester. And, as a result, many students may be forced to take on additional debt." The analysis found that, for students taking 12 credits or fewer per semester, the Republican budget proposal could increase the cost of an associate degree by up to $3,700 and a bachelor's degree by $7,400. About 1.3 million students could lose Pell entirely, and another roughly 3 million could see their awards reduced. The analysis based its estimates of how many students will be affected on data from 2011-12, the last time the government released national data on how many credits students were taking. It applies that breakdown to more current enrollment figures. Partridge and other experts say the estimates are likely conservative, because the share of students attending part time has risen over the last decade. Students at community colleges would be especially hard hit, according to the report. An estimated 80 percent of Pell recipients at community colleges would see a cut and a third would lose eligibility for the federal grant altogether. Related: The Hechinger Report's Tuition Tracker helps reveal the real cost of college At Ivy Tech Community College in Indianapolis, the proposed rules could affect nearly 33,000 students who could lose, in total, about $19 million in financial aid, according to Mary Jane Michalak, the college's senior vice president for legal and public affairs. About 70 percent of Ivy Tech students attend part time and their average age is 27. Nearly a quarter financially support children or other family members. About 7,000 Ivy Tech students would lose Pell entirely under the proposed changes, but, Michalak wrote in an email, their "less-than-half-time status is often a reflection of life circumstances, not a lack of ambition." "For these students, taking even one or two classes per term is a major commitment layered on top of already full schedules," she said. "Flexible and incremental pathways are often the only viable route to a credential of value." Chris Rose, a Pell Grant recipient and student at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, said getting through college without financial means is already difficult. He was raised primarily by his grandmother - his father has been incarcerated since he was 1 and his mother has been in and out of jail. "We just don't have the generational wealth to pay for the cost of higher education," he said, describing Pell as a "lifeline." He has also received help from The Scholarship Foundation of St. Louis, a private grantmaker. Rose, a marketing major who expects to graduate in 2026, said he has typically taken 15 credits each semester. But at times he's taken only 12, for example, when he was dealing with family problems and had a harder time concentrating on his studies. Under the proposed legislation, that decision would have resulted in nearly $1,500 less in grant money. To make up such a shortfall, Rose said he would have needed to borrow more or get a job. And it would be a constant stressor. "When you don't come from money, you're already worried about money," he said. Some researchers are also concerned that the change to Pell could steer students away from more challenging classes that can also lead to more lucrative careers. Taking a five-class course load as a science major, for example, while holding a job or taking care of family, may seem too daunting, said Veronica Minaya, a senior research associate at the Community College Research Center at Teachers College, Columbia University. (The Hechinger Report is an independent unit of Teachers College.) Related:The return of student loan debt collection: What borrowers need to know Supporters of the bill say that concerns about the proposal's harm to low-income students are overblown and that changes to Pell will result in a more effective use of federal dollars. "Obviously there's a trade-off here. But if people are not completing the number of credits that they need to remain on track for finishing their degrees, that's also going to carry costs," said Preston Cooper, senior fellow at the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute. He also noted that the longer a student is enrolled in college, the less likely they are to graduate. "The federal government has limited resources, and we need to think about how we can best deploy those resources in order to maximize student success," said Cooper. "People who are only taking one or two courses per semester, it's going to be very difficult for them to actually finish their programs. And federally subsidizing that pathway might not be setting those students up for success." Supporters of the bill also point to a new proposed stream of funding for low-income students known as workforce Pell. The approach has bipartisan support and would allow students to use federal student aid to pay for programs that take between eight and 15 weeks to complete and lead to a job that's in demand in the state where they live. Opponents say there are more effective ways to encourage on-time graduation, such as year-round Pell, which allows students to take 12 credits per semester and six in the summer. "Reward the behavior you want to see, but don't punish people who can't do it," said Jill Desjean, director of policy analysis at the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators. Advocates said the Republican proposal represents a marked shift in the political conversation around low-income students in college. "Until recently, we were talking about doubling Pell," Minaya said. "Instead of thinking, 'Let's punish those who are not enrolling full time,' I think the government should encourage them and think about, 'How can we help you to enroll full time?'" Contact investigations editor Sarah Butrymowicz at butrymowicz@ or on Signal: @sbutry.04. Contact senior investigative reporter Meredith Kolodner at kolodner@ or on Signal: @merkolodner.04. This story about Pell Grants was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for our higher education newsletter. The post College costs would soar for some low-income students under Republican bill appeared first on The Hechinger Report.
