Debt-Free College: Something New, Something Borrowed

By Mary Nguyen Barry

Congressional Democrats have introduced resolutions calling for debt-free college. The original idea comes from our staff in a more fleshed-out form.

Now we don’t know the exact policy design Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) had in mind before introducing their resolutions. But as our staff has thought through how a debt-free promise could be carried out, we’ve learned two major lessons:

(1) Big financial resources for education should target students from hard-pressed middle class and low-income families.

Many students already go to college debt-free. They’re generally from wealthy families. There’s already too much non-need-based aid – from the federal, state, and institutional level – that goes to students from very wealthy families. So instead, scarce resources should be targeted on those who need the most help.

(2) Big financial resources work best and are best received when they’re coupled with responsibility and accountability components.

We’ve seen in K-12 policy that when resources are coupled with reform, student achievement goes up and dropout rates go down. And while “debt-free college” sends a fantastic message to working-class families, it does not necessarily send the best political message. Democratic hopefuls who want to embrace the substantive idea might be wise to market around something other than the word “free.”

Because contrary to popular belief, not everyone likes a “free” government benefit. Poll after poll about President Obama’s community college plan, for example, has found drastically lower levels of support among Republicans and Independents, critical swing states, and those over 45 years old or who come from the top 60 percent of families.

Here are some of the problems with “free college” from a marketing perspective:

When something is “free,” it makes some think of the old adage: “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.” In other words, it’s a trick. It’s too good to be true.

A “free” government benefit makes others think of the term “freeloaders,” which is a dangerous red flag to some. Those who financed their college education with heavy loan burdens might think debt-free for others isn’t fair.

Finally, there’s the concern that if college is “free,” some students might not take it very seriously. When you pay out of pocket, you care about getting your money’s worth.

While these negative images seem in many ways unfair and are not the intention behind campaigns like “debt-free college” or “free community college,” the word “free” nevertheless rubs some the wrong way and undermines political support.

The latest iteration of our plan is slightly different. We think students should have to work to get the benefit of heightened college affordability. We think colleges should have to show responsibility – for all students and subgroups of students – on access and success metrics in order to benefit. And we think there’s a winning political message associated with the design of plans that could achieve the same result as debt-free college for low-income students.

“Cap Student Debt” for those who evidence they’re assuming their fair share of academic and financial responsibility.

“Cap Student Debt” sends an equally simple message as debt-free college, but doesn’t conjure the same contentious image that “free” engenders. Cap student debt fosters the image of shared responsibility. And it can generate the same policy outcome for our country’s neediest students without explicitly saying so.

The latest version of our plan calls for the federal government to increase or target existing federal financial aid to the bottom 80 percent of families in terms of income and deliver the ‘saved’ $25 billion to states through a flexible partnership grant program. In exchange, states, colleges, and students would have to meet several conditions:

Ronald Brownstein from the National Journal already has called this plan “visionary…a powerful conception of shared responsibility.”

If every key player in higher education (states, colleges, students, and the federal government) is willing to do their part, then we can go a long way toward making the dream of a college degree a reality for all.

Here’s to hoping that Hillary Clinton – and others – will embrace a plan with bipartisan appeal.