The change in Congressional leadership after the midterms will have a definite impact on higher education policy outcomes over the last two years of the Obama presidency.
Republican control of Congress will likely have mixed effects for colleges and universities. They are likely to find Republicans more helpful on efforts to roll back federal regulations. Battles over federal funding are likely to be even more difficult though, as Republicans are expected to embrace more austere budget caps. Democrat led initiatives for student loan interest rates, the college ratings system and more limits on for-profit institutions are not likely to see any movement now. Efforts to tie a college rating system to federal funding are particularly unlikely to ever become law given they face a negatively united republican Congress and little support from Democrats. However, Republicans still lack a veto-proof majority in either chamber so blocking gainful employment or other bills guaranteed to be rejected by the president are unlikely.
Congressional Committee Leadership
Lamar Alexander (R) of Tennessee will be the new Chair of the HELP committee. He has stated publically an interest in starting “from scratch” on HEA with a focus on streamlining FAFSA and reducing federal regulations. His leadership makes room for “more imaginative” policy ideas suggested by others in the Republican cohort to get some attention. Patty Murray (D) of Washington will be the top Democrat in the Senate. John Kline of MN will continue as chair and Bobby Scott will be top Democrat on the House Education Committee.
Budget
Although Democrats had previously indicated support for relieving the Budget Control Act caps, republicans have repeatedly indicated approval for the caps as a way to reduce the deficit. That, combined with traditional republican enthusiasm for reducing federal spending, indicates that the next round of automatic budget cuts in 2016 are unlikely to be averted under the new leadership. Funding could also be slashed in the budget if simplifying the financial aid process becomes a way to cut overall spending. Advocates are expecting to fight against “paying down the deficits on the backs of students” according to Justin Draeger, the president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators. However, there is some optimism that Senate Chairman Alexander will be “willing to engage” on the issue of funding and student loan access.
Additional details about the impact of the midterms on higher education policy were discussed during Inside Higher Education’s “This Week” podcast.
An overview of the panelists' insights is included below, and the panelists' bios are at the end of the article.
Have you and colleagues at college associations had interesting conversations since the election?
Hurley- Some of it was anticipated. Change of direction in federal policy as dictated by congress. Alexander has different set of priorities than Harkin had. Think it’s a positive direction for higher education. Focus on deregulation, simplifying financial aid process. In all of congress the mood is going to be more conservative toward funding generally and for academic research. Where things stand on gainful employment and college ratings is up in the air.
Is Alexander the big man in higher ed for the next two years?
Jasik- Yes, but my prediction for biggest impact in Congress is two things: 1) Incredibly frugal budget, even more so than if Lamar was running the show. The new team doesn’t want to spend much on anything. When you are in a hostile environment for all spending higher education gets hit because it isn’t protected the way other areas are and 2) For-profit higher ed is probably happy with the results of the election. Gainful employment maybe be challenged in Congress as well as the Courts. I think using the Congressional Committees to draw scrutiny on for-profits is probably over.
What are prospects for higher ed policy/funding/planning?
Loss- Sen. Alexander will be faced with challenges. Hawks looking to slash funding will be a big issue. His other biggest claim is deregulation of all aspects of higher ed. Lots of talk around that and starting from scratch with HEA. How feasible is it to deregulate an economy so deeply entwined with federal and state government. The other question with the HEA is how likely is it to reboot a piece of omnibus legislation?
About HEA reauthorization. It’s a big document. Sen. Alexander has said he wants to simplify. Is it possible to start from scratch?
Hurley- I think there is good intention to start from scratch. A lot of people support that but politically I don’t think the passage is all that realistic. I think there will be a focus in 2015 on HEA, but I don’t see it as a priority for Alexander. With all the focus in Congress on the budget and looking at the policy mode. We only have about 15mnths before freeze-mode going into the next election. I don’t see a whole lot of significant legislation passing. Also, Alexander has said that ESEA is the priority ahead of HEA.
Alexander says he wants to simplify FAFSA. How big is the challenge to simplify?
Jasik- No one is anti-simplification, but its more complicated than people expect. If you simplify it there will be a scandal in a year from people gaming the system somehow, and people will ask why did Congress get rid of all the controls? In addition, in reauthorization a lot of members of Congress use it to tack on something. That all adds up to a lot of regulation, but it reflects hot political issues. It will require Alexander to shut that down if he really wants this to pass as simplified.
There have been concerns about funding different parts of the sciences. Will this be part of the contentious conversations?
Jasik- There are several members that like to pick on particular sciences that deal with hot button social issues they don’t approve of. With republicans in control of Congress those voices are likely to be louder than they would be if democrats were in charge.
Hurley- That will be debated and we will see some rhetorical flashpoints from some members, but when it is over I don’t see lower levels of funding for one over the other.
Looking at the states. Results were mixed no matter how you score it. Whats the landscape for states over the next few years?
Hurley- Big take away was the continuing republican gains for third election cycle. Most republican legislative chambers since 1928. Biggest surprise were republican gubernatorial pickups in traditionally blue states: IL, MA, MD. Higher ed wasn’t particularly high on campaign issues. One message was that governors could cut higher ed, sometimes significantly and still get reelected although there were obviously other factors at play. Im not necessarily pessimistic about state support of higher ed because it has more to do with economics. Higher ed gets cut more heavily in downturns and benefits strongly in upturns. While state spending might be a little lower than under democratic leadership at the state level, Im still optimistic about it over the coming years.
Higher ed wasn’t a top issue, there was a lot about college costs. Certainly that’s a state issue. As you look at the landscape what do you see over the next couple of years?
Loss- Im probably not as optimistic about the state higher ed level. We still aren’t at pre-recession levels. The big question in this climate in the hand of republicans, especially against the onset of the ACA and other federal items over the years, is that there will be an inclination to cut taxes. That will raise significant revenue questions at the state level in the coming years. Combined with budget hawk activity at the federal level will make money a major concern.
Closing comments. What and who should we be watching over the next several years?”
Loss- Watch the new leadership at federal level. Big issues are reauthorization, ratings, regulation. I think its important to remember theres a whole backlog of education policies, including ESEA. Theres a lot to get done and I think the question is whether this Congress can be more productive than one of the least productive Congresses in our history.
Jasik- I think the states will have more of an influence than the federal government. Im really curious to see if the states with republican legislatures do pass tax cuts that will lead to spending cuts in higher ed budgets. I think that since governors ran on anti-tax, anti-regulation platforms it could get complicated for higher education leaders.
Hurley- A lot of focus will be at the federal level. The leadership in place now will draw that attention. Certainly a lot of focus on college affordability, access and accountability. There may be a focus on reducing regulatory burden but accountability will be the major theme.
For more in-depth coverage, check out these articles in AACRAO Transcript:
And watch AACRAO Transcript for further news this week.
*Panelist Bios:
Daniel Hurley provides the 420 U.S. public college and university presidents, chancellors and system heads that comprise the American Association of State Colleges and Universities membership with analysis, commentary and advocacy on a broad range of public policy issues affecting higher education at the campus, system, state and national level. His expertise includes issues related to the financing of public higher education, financial aid, college access and student success, and institutional best practices.
Christopher Loss is a professor who specializes in twentieth-century American history with an emphasis on the social, political, and policy history of American higher education. Loss has also written essays on current academic affairs for the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed, and the Princeton University Press Blog. He teaches courses on the history of higher education and public policy in the HOD major and in LPO’s professional and doctoral programs. In 2010 Loss won Peabody College’s Excellence for Classroom Teaching Award.
Scott Jaschik is one of the three founders of Inside Higher Ed. With Doug Lederman, he leads the editorial operations of Inside Higher Ed, overseeing news content, opinion pieces, career advice, blogs and other features. Scott is a leading voice on higher education issues, quoted regularly in publications nationwide, and publishing articles on colleges in publications such as The New York Times, The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, Salon, and elsewhere.
Kenneth Green (Moderator) is the founding director of The Campus Computing Project, the largest continuing study of the role of computing, eLearning, and information technology in American higher education. An invited speaker at some two dozen academic conferences and professional meetings each year, Green is the author/co-author or editor of 20 books and published research reports and more than 100 articles and commentaries that have appeared in academic journals and professional publications.