Letter: Supporting Our Students, Strengthening our Country

Published: August 31, 2010, 2:42 am ET
President of the United States of America

At colleges and universities across America, students are heading into the classroom, many for the first time. You’re taking part in a journey that will not only determine your future, but the future of this country. We know, for example, that nearly eight in ten new jobs will require workforce training or higher education by the end of this decade. And we know that in a global economy, the nation that out-educates us today will out-compete us tomorrow. In the 21st century, America’s success depends on the education our students receive.

That’s why, soon after I took office, I proposed an ambitious goal: by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. And over the past year and a half, we’ve been putting in place policies to help us meet this goal.

First, we are making college more affordable. As students, you know why this matters. Over the past 10 years, college costs have shot up faster than housing, transportation and even health care costs. The amount student borrowers owe has risen almost 25 percent in just five years. This isn’t some abstract issue to me. Michelle and I had big loans to pay off when we graduated. I remember what that burden feels like. No one in America should be saddled with crushing debt simply because they sought an education. And no one should be denied a chance to make the most of their lives because they can’t afford it.

That’s why we fought so hard to win a battle that has been raging in Washington for years over how to administer student loans. Under the old system, taxpayers paid banks and financial companies billions of dollars in subsidies to act as middlemen –- a deal that was very lucrative for them, but unnecessary and wasteful. And because these special interests were so powerful, this boondoggle survived for decades. But this year, we said, enough is enough. As a result, instead of handing over $60 billion in unwarranted subsidies to big banks, we’re redirecting that money to upgrade America’s community colleges and make college more affordable for nearly 8 million students and families.

We’re tripling the investment in college tax credits for middle class families. We’re raising the value of Pell Grants, and we’ll make sure they increase each year to better keep up with inflation. We’re making loan repayments more manageable for more than one million more students. Future borrowers can even choose an income-based payment plan so that you don’t have to pay more than 10 percent of your salary each month. And if you go into public service, and keep up with your payments, your leftover student debt will be forgiven after 10 years. As part of this effort, we’re simplifying financial aid forms, too, by eliminating dozens of unnecessary questions.

I’d also point out: one way we’re helping young people afford college is by helping them to afford health insurance. Because of the new health care law, young adults can stay on their parents’ health plans until they are 26 years old.

Second, a college education needs to be more than affordable; it needs to prepare graduates for the jobs of the 21st century. Community colleges – undervalued assets in this country – are well-positioned to lead this effort. That’s why we’re upgrading these institutions by tying the skills taught in classrooms to the needs of local businesses in growing sectors of the economy.

The third part of our higher education strategy is making sure more students complete college. Over a third of America’s college students, and over half our minority students, don’t earn a degree, even after six years. That’s not just a waste of money; it’s an incredible waste of potential that holds our country back. We don’t just need to open the doors of college to more Americans; we need to ensure that students walk back out of those doors with a degree in their hands.

Of course, that depends on students. You are responsible for your own success. But there is more we can do to remove barriers to finishing college, especially for those earning a degree while working or raising a family. That’s why I’ve proposed a College Access and Completion Fund, to develop, implement, and evaluate new approaches to improving college success and completion, particularly for students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

So we are making college more affordable, gearing the education you receive to the demands of a global economy, and taking steps to lift graduation rates. Because this is how we’ll retake the lead in producing college graduates. This is how we’ll help students like you to fulfill your dreams. And this is how we’ll ensure that America prospers in this new century, and that we harness the greatest source of our strength: the talents of our people.

Comments »
To post a comment, leave your first and last name and a valid e-mail address. Comments may not appear immediately because they must be approved by a moderator before posting. No registration is required, but you may sign in with DISQUS, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, or OpenID.
  • Grant Gibbs

    More like “supporting our students, bankrupting our country”. I don’t want to fulfill my dreams, I just want to see some fiscal responsibility in government. Thanks for worsening the deficit Mr. President. Thanks for making me pay for bailing out those whose combination of stupidity and greed nearly ruined our economy.

    I regret to inform you that you cannot buy my vote with deficit spending, though I appreciate the gesture.

  • Jake Morrison

    Just to correct a quick error here Grant, the “bailout of those whose combination of stupidity and greed nearly ruined our economy,” by which I assume you mean “TARP,” was in fact signed into law prior to President Obama’s inauguration and therefore it seems highly unlikely he was President when the bill was signed (October 3rd, 2008). I think it’s important we don’t mislead people, especially when it comes to historical facts.

    Aside from that the only bill he has signed into law which has substantially increased the deficit would be the stimulus, which is a separate issue we can debate the merits of. You would obviously say it was a pure waste of money, while I would say that the economic benefits will offset much of the cost.

    Lets not forget that President Obama has signed a formidable piece of deficit reducing legislation into law, in the form of Health Care Reform, which the non-partisan CBO has projected, as recently as its August report, will reduce the budget deficit by $30 billion dollars over the next 10 years. If it were to be repealed, they estimate there would be an increase in deficits by close to $455 billion.

    Oh, and I also will be able to afford health care at least until I’m 26 since I’ll be able to stay on my parents plan.

    So thanks Mr. President. Keep up the good work.

  • Grant Gibbs

    You seem to be responding to an imaginary Republican straw-horse. How kind of you to assume I’m from a camp that enjoys that much popular support.

    Just because Obama wasn’t president when TARP was signed doesn’t mean he doesn’t share the blame. He “stayed the course” on some irresponsible policies Bush started. see

    http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Economy/story?id=6626721&page=1

    for more details. And also notice that I was not implying that Bush wasn’t part of the problem, but merely commenting on Obama, as he’s the one who wrote this letter.

    And yes, the stimulus was a waste of money. Sure, we got SOMETHING out of it, but its cost/benefit ratio was way off. In the long run it will cost us.

    Healthcare “reform” is not a debate worth getting into, at least until all its provisions kick in. But keep in mind that nothing is budget neutral until all the chips have fallen.

    We can both enjoy our parents insurance until we’re 26…and then wake up to realize that our republic is rotting beneath our feet. Do you honestly think forcing insurance companies to take on sick people and those with pre-existing conditions will lower prices???

    It is wonderful to get all these stimulus checks and goodies from the government. But there is a cost, and our generation will pay it. But of course, it won’t be the poor people who pay it…it will be college grads like us who make whatever amount of money the politicians in power at the time deem to be above the upper limit of their arbitrarily defined “middle class”. Or worse yet, Republicans will cut taxes while keeping the government large, digging us deeper and deeper into our fiscal hole.

  • Jake Morrison

    As for TARP, it’s hard to prove whether it did or did not do what it was intended to, because the argument for it is that it averted a far worse disaster. All I will say is that if it did, I’m glad it was passed. If it didn’t, then I obviously wish it wasn’t. Hindsight is 20/20 and I don’t think there were too many leaders around who opposed emergency measures when top economists were warning that the economy was on the verge of imploding with the financial sector. I don’t think there’s really anyone who can come up with a definitive answer on that. I wish it had followed up with tougher financial regulations and a real overhaul of the system so that banks were subject to proper oversight and no longer allowed to become “too big to fail.” Instead we got a version watered down by special interests, bank lobbyists, and conservatives who wanted to continue deregulation in the face of a burnout indisputably caused by Bush and Clinton’s deregulation of the financial sector. Welcome to Congress.

    I’ll disagree with you on the stimulus, and go with the recent report from the non-partisan CBO which suggests that the stimulus worked as well, if not better, than expected.

    If 21 page reports are your thing;

    http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/110xx/doc11044/02-23-ARRA.pdf

    Otherwise, you can find the summary, as I did, on multiple websites.

    As for Health Care, I’m again going to defer to the CBO as the overall most reliable source for numbers. They claim it’s going to reduce the projected deficit over the next 10 to 20 years by a significant amount.

    And yes, I do think forcing companies to cover people will lower the price of insurance because it creates a much larger pool. Yeah, it will cover people with pre-existing conditions, but it will also add millions of people without such conditions to further dilute the risk for the insurance companies, thus lowering prices. Alone the mandate isn’t enough, but it’s necessary to succeed with other aspects. Yeah, it might not work as well as people hope (it may work better), but until you get everyone covered you can’t even start talking about controlling costs. Once the “chips fall,” we can make necessary adjustments.

    I think everyone should watch Bill Clinton’s interview from a few days ago on the Daily Show, even if you don’t like that show and hate Jon Stewart (Jon hardly does any of the talking. If you don’t like him, ignore him.) I think it’s one of the most reasonable, moderate, and common sense explanations for moderate liberal policies I’ve heard. Rather than ramble on, I’ll just let him do the talking and say I pretty much agree with it.

    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-16-2010/exclusive—bill-clinton-extended-interview-pt–1