By Catherine Brown, Senior Director, Policy and Advocacy
Reading time: Four minutes
Last week, the National College Attainment Network (NCAN) hosted a webinar on the stakes for higher education policy in the 2024 election. Featuring Wil Del Pilar, Senior Vice President of Ed Trust, and
Michael Brickman, Director of Education Policy at the Cicero Institute, this lively and informative conversation touched on the key policy issues both speakers anticipate taking center stage
if Vice President Harris or former President Trump prevails in the presidential election. As a leader at Ed Trust, an organization committed to advancing policies and practices to dismantle the racial and economic barriers embedded in the American
education system, Del Pilar represented the progressive prospective while Brickman represented the conservative perspective, having served in the Office of Postsecondary Education during the Trump Administration and as an adjunct fellow at the
American Enterprise Institute, or AEI, in addition to his job at Cicero.
The dialogue began with Brickman welcoming the opportunity for civil conversation among people with differing perspectives, something that has been hard to come by in recent years. Federal education policy has long been an area of bi-partisan agreement:
The No Child Left Behind Act, for example, was championed by liberal titans Ted Kennedy and George Miller as well as conservative leaders Senator Lamar Alexander and President George W. Bush, and it was President Trump who signed the Free Application
for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) Simplification Act into law after it received strong support from Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. Nevertheless, as the country has grown more polarized so has education policy. The Higher Education Act
was last reauthorized in 2008, and the current Congress passed exactly zero pieces of higher education legislation this year. Still, both speakers expressed hope for more bi-partisanship and identified agrees of consensus.
As the conversation got into the details, it became clear that while they agreed on a lot, they also disagreed on some important points. What to do about burgeoning student loan debt was one. The speakers agreed that graduate student loans contribute
disproportionately to the problem of too many student borrowers holding unmanageable levels of debt, but were less aligned about how policymakers should respond. Brickman made clear that the SAVE program, President Biden’s signature income-driven
repayment program, would be suspended under a Trump presidency and argued that debt forgiveness programs, such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF), fuel the rising cost of college by protecting colleges and universities from the consequences
of raising tuition and fees. He shared that some graduate programs include PSLF in their financial aid awards and encourage students to think of these funds as similar to grants because the federal government will cancel the debt after ten years.
Del Pilar noted that limiting student borrowing could limit access to higher education, especially for Black and Brown students who come from families that have not had the opportunity to build intergenerational wealth. He noted that if loan forgiveness
programs or graduate student borrowing options are eliminated or restricted, only students from wealthy families may be able to enroll, which would limit the power of higher education to be an engine of social mobility and a remedy of the racial wealth
gap.
Funding for higher education revealed another clear divergence of opinion. Del Pilar noted that Vice President Harris would likely continue President Biden’s support for doubling the Pell Grant while Brickman predicted that any new federal spending or
federal-state partnership would have to be predicated upon institutional accountability to pass muster with Republicans. He also disputed the notion that states have disinvested in higher education over the last 15 years, noting that different metrics
can yield rosier results.
Both speakers agreed that skills-based hiring and training programs were topics of bi-partisan consensus. They noted that Governors Josh Shapiro (D-PA) and Jared Polis (D-CO) and former Governor Hogan (R-MD) and other lawmakers have eliminated college
degree requirements from public service job descriptions. Brickman pointed out that President Trump championed that policy with an Executive Order, and he was not sure what else there is for the federal government to do on this front.
Del Pilar noted that community colleges receive strong support from Republicans and Democrats, and while Brickman agreed, he said there are innovative private training and credit transfer models that also deserve federal support, and that any federal
accountability policy should include all institutions of higher education, including community colleges and for-profit colleges.
Both speakers agreed that states are at the forefront of higher education policy and that the policies and practices they develop can lead the way for other states and the nation. Still, it’s clear November 5 will be a consequential day for NCAN students.
We will keep you updated and informed about the election results and their impact on our federal policy agenda in 2025 and beyond. In the meantime, please make your voice heard and VOTE!
Email to a Friend