New Education Budget Cuts Mean Less For Low-Income College Students

March 9, 2011  

By Kimmy Ryan

Proposed Budget Cuts from on Vimeo.

President Obama is proposing to cut 100 billion dollars in Pell Grants and other federal education programs.

Pell Grants help more than nine million low-income students each year. With a large increase in recipients in the past few years, the Pell Grant Program faces a $20 billion funding shortfall.

The proposed cuts means fewer students will receive the grants, but those who are eligible will receive the maximum award of $5,500 per school year. Students will no longer be able to receive two grants in one year, both a summer school and school year grant. Savings from these cuts would be $60 billion in ten years.

Graduate and professional school students will also face changes. The graduate student debt burden will increase due to changes in loan subsidies. These cuts will save the federal goverment $29 billion in ten years.

Students will be greatly affected by these budget cuts: college tuitions are rising across the United States and need-based grants are being cut.

Enter Google AdSense Code Here


One Response to “New Education Budget Cuts Mean Less For Low-Income College Students”

  1. Milan Moravec on March 11th, 2011 1:52 am

    Unfortunately due to the spend thrift actions of campus chancellors tuition at University of California has risen to $50,000. Just how widespread is the budget crisis at University of California Berkeley? University of California Chancellor Robert J Birgeneau’s ($500,000 salary) eight-year fiscal track record is dismal indeed. He would like to blame the politicians, since they stopped giving him every dollar he has asked for, and the state legislators do share some responsibility for the financial crisis. But not in the sense he means.
    A competent chancellor would have been on top of identifying inefficiencies in the system and then crafting a plan to fix them. Competent oversight by the Board of Regents and the legislature would have required him to provide data on problems and on what steps he was taking to solve them. Instead, every year Birgeneau would request a budget increase, the regents would agree to it, and the legislature would provide. The hard questions were avoided by all concerned, and the problems just piled up to $150 million of inefficiencies….until there was no money left.
    It’s not that Birgeneau was unaware that there were, in fact, waste and inefficiencies in the system. Faculty and staff have raised issues with senior management, but when they failed to see relevant action taken, they stopped. Finally, Birgeneau ($500,000 salary) engaged some expensive ($7.2 million) consultants, Bain & Company, to tell him what he should have been able to find out from the bright, engaged people in his own organization.
    In short, there is plenty of blame to go around. Merely cutting out inefficiencies will not have the effect desired. But you never want a serious crisis to go to waste. An opportunity now exists for the UC President, Chairman of the UC Board of Regents Gould, California Legislators to jolt Cal back to life, applying some simple oversight check-and-balance management practices. Increasing the budget is not enough; transforming senior management is necessary. The faculty, Academic Senate, Cal. Alumni, financial donors, benefactors await Cal senior management’s transformation.

    UC Berkeley public reprimand, censure: NCAA places Chancellor Birgeneau’s men’s basketball program on probation

    The author who has 35 years’ consulting experience, has taught at University of California Berkeley, where he was able to observe the culture and the way senior management work.

    (World class preeminent public research and teaching UC Berkeley ranking tumbles from 2nd best. In 2004 the London-based Times Higher Education ranked UC Berkeley the second leading university in the world, just behind Harvard; in 2009 that ranking tumbled to 39th place. By 2011 the ranking had not returned to 2nd best)