Financial aid? You've never dabbled? What's the big deal? Everybody's doing it. Here, take off your coat, grab a FAFSA and relax. Trust me, it's out of this world.

Well, actually, federal financial aid is out of this world. At an astronomical cost of more than $100 billion annually, this "investment in our children" runs contrary to many core notions of American life and prevents the most efficient distribution of aid to students — all while creating a moral hazard that prompts schools to raise tuition rates.

It is time to solve those problems by eliminating federal financial aid in higher education.

Federal financial aid, like the No Child Left Behind Act, represents a lamentable intrusion into the affairs of the states by the federal government. Except for the Montgomery GI Bill in the wake of World War II, the federal government refrained from entangling itself in college financial aid until the Higher Education Act of the 1960s. Interestingly, the average cost of college tuition has risen, in real dollars, to four times what it was in 1975.

Ending federal financial aid would not only eliminate this license for irresponsibility, but eliminate a swath of the federal bureaucracy and curb some of the federal government's excessive influence over education policy. Importantly, it would also serve as recognition that states are simply better situated when it comes to responding to the educational needs of citizens.

States, given the chance, might opt for a better path. Instead of devoting millions of tax dollars annually to funding and oversight of financial-aid programs, Wisconsin could divert the revenue to a straight-up reduction in tuition costs across the board. Tuition would cost less for all UW students. Period. State tax dollars would still subsidize higher education, but it would give taxpayers and students a greater "bang for their buck," as funds would not have to run through federal or state agencies that require significant overhead administrative costs.

Ending the smorgasbord of government grants, loans and subsidies would clarify a common misconception — namely, that Americans have the right to a college education. They most certainly do not.

Besides merit-based financial-aid awards to reward achievement or federal scholarships, like the Barry Goldwater Scholarship, which helps to meet national security goals, government financial aid is, at root, another entitlement. It is one more manifestation of a tendency today to let the state wrap its tentacles comfortably around our necks. Our tolerance of such dependency is symptomatic of a national amnesia about what made this nation great.

The current financial-aid scheme goes against the grain of American tradition. It emphasizes equality of outcome over equality of opportunity. Students do not face an equal starting line of a standard aid package — or no aid package at all. The poorer the student's family, the more extravagant the aid package. This paradigm has led to perverse results. Poor students have their university experiences paid for through federal grants, while wealthy students have their family's financial backing.

Students from middle-class families or students who earned scholarships, however, are confronted with a conundrum. Their families do not qualify for financial aid, but they often cannot contribute much or anything at all. Their scholarships cover some — but not all — of their educational expenses. It is precisely this twilight zone that proceeds directly from financial aid.

These talented middle-class students are left in a strange limbo where they are excluded from federal work-study programs they would otherwise pursue. Here, students barred from financial aid due to scholarships are actually penalized for being talented in high school. The government's attempt to force equality ultimately winds up creating a new inequality.

Students, if they truly value an education, should turn to work instead of government subsidization. With the overall reduction in tuition that could be made possible by the elimination of federal financial aid, students would need only opt for gainful employment in the form of a part-time job and steady summer work. It would not only give a student a sense of ownership over his education, but also keep him from flying off into the heady clouds that swirl around the ivory tower. It would reinforce the idea of the individual student as an independent decision-maker, someone willing to take personal responsibility and determine the course of his own future.

Students truly can do better than continuing the present addiction.

Brad Vogel ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in journalism and political science and is an at-large member of The Badger Herald Editorial Board.