Opinion
20 words to ponder
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- The Invisible Man Award: Wyndham Manning (May 7, 2009)
- The People's Choice Award: Jacqueline Hitchon et. al (May 7, 2009)
- The Lifetime Achievement Award: ASM (May 7, 2009)
- Honest representation (May 5, 2009)
- Junger for ASM Chair (May 5, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
“And we will make it easier for Americans to afford a college education, by increasing the size of Pell Grants.” — Twenty words from President Bush we were glad to hear last night, though slightly more attention would have been appreciated.
All sides of the political spectrum agree that President Bush’s domestic and foreign-policy agendas are bold and vast. While his Social Security proposals will make headlines and political waves, tax reform and medical liability reform will be scarcely easier to move through Congress. All are worthy causes, but the president’s obligation to strengthen a program that aids many underserved students, lifting them to improved economic possibilities through higher education, remains an essence of his larger message.
If the president is truly committed to the power of transformative freedom across generations, a primary goal at home must be greater economic security in an increasingly competitive world. The cornerstone to preserving and transforming the American economy for future generations is a robust system of higher education to which those who strive will find an open door.
The president campaigned on the 1 million new Pell Grant recipients in his first term. However, recent reports from the Department of Education look to impinge the benefits grant beneficiaries receive. That a renewed commitment to Pell Grants made an appearance in the president’s text is a positive sign toward a necessary policy shift.
We hope that Congress will not lose this pledge to increase Pell Grants in the political din of the upcoming session. We encourage members to echo the president’s commitment and take action to secure a stronger future for access to American higher education.
After all, if the president has dedicated so much breath to securing the future of today’s retirees and those who will follow in their shadow over the coming decades, we would hope his vision is broad enough to encompass those that will soon replace them in the work force. Indeed, education must be a priority, as it is today’s student force that will be chiefly responsible for looking out for tomorrow’s elderly.
7 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
"...as it is today's student force that will be chiefly responsible for looking out for tomorrow's elderly."
Isn't that more a job for "undocumented" workers?
I believe that the plan Bush favors does involve increasing the amount of some Pell grants, but decreasing the actual number of awards given. So some people get more, but many people will get nothing or much less.
"So some people get more"
Those would be the wealthy people who can already afford college without Pell grants.
"but many people will get nothing or much less."
Those would be the poor people who need the grants the most.
"Those would be the wealthy people who can already afford college without Pell grants.
Those would be the poor people who need the grants the most."
You are pretty damn dilusional if you think "wealthy" people get pell grants. I agree that poor people need the most funding, but there are two main factors which lend to the issue that the income level set for Pell grants should be increased and not decreased. 1. As you probably know, college tuition is on the rise, not falling. This means that even middle class families are struggling to send their kids to college. When my dad went here in the dark ages is cost him a cool 150 a semester, and when i graduated i was paying damn near 30 times that, and I'm in state. 2. The EFC (thats expected family contribution used to determine federal aid) formula is severly flawed. It takes into acount both antiquated cost of living and old tuition factors. My lower middle class family was expected to contribute about 12,500 a year towards my education (damn near 20% of their PREtax income). This is simply rediculous. In theory I should have reiceved grants because there was no way I could have afforded college. Due to the low cutoff for Pell grants and an unrealisticially high EFC though, I didnt qualify for federal grants. I am now paying my loans off for the next ten years, and dont mind because that is just the facts of life in american higher education. I am merely concerned that cutting the total number of people recieving grants may be further detrimental to higher ed. Especially with tuition continually rising, grants, both in size and number, should be increasing, and not decreasing, otherwise higher ed faces serious problems (admission skewed towards more wealthy IE the fact that the average UW student's parents make 30K more than the average income in WI). There arent any easy answers (as I know more grants requires more taxes etc), I just think you simplified the issue.
Z
"You are pretty damn dilusional"
Dilusional?
Does that mean I'm of two lusions?
What's a lusion?
I'd be a lot more inclined to give weight to your argument in you learned how to spell.
An attack on spelling is a weak retort (especially with a typo).
"An attack on spelling is a weak retort (especially with a typo)."
That was pretty funny! I wonder, though, if the typo was intentional. Sarcasm doesn't always translate well in writing.