Greetings from Aztlanland

The Elephant in the Living Room

The Three INS Monkeys

Why California is Crumbling

The Crisis and Politics of Higher Education II

Of course, as the Title IV regulations grow in number and scope every year, they affect profoundly the management deliberations of any college that is subject to their commands--which is to say, practically every college. The Higher Education Act is the very model of bureaucratic legislation: top down, complex, requiring interpretation of endless details by everyone concerned, and placing power over local things in remote beings whose very job titles are indecipherable, and who, also, have almost no direct contact with the actual things being accomplished.

Federal aid to higher education is politically potent. This is true because people who work in colleges are powerful. It is true also because the public, for a good reason and a bad one, believes in higher education and thinks it worthy of public support. Education is rightly seen as the road up, the avenue of progress for all. Popular government, moreover, requires a capacity for governing be widely spread, that education at all levels should impart the knowledge and civility requisites to good citizenship. Without these qualities, the people who make the laws will not act justly or respect liberty and the rule of law and the people who live under the laws will not know what to do about that. The preservation of the republic depends, therefore, upon a proper system of education. At its highest, education is the contemplation of the ultimate ends in virtue of which means are selected for the sake of private and public happiness. The American people's recognition of education's importance creates favor for a Higher Education Act presumed to serve these ends. However, those who believe that defense spending is excessive should think about the fact that since 9/11 defense spending has increased 47% while higher education spending has risen 133 percent. Which is out of control?

Immivasion

The Crisis and Politics of Higher Education

Many of our politicians have it backwards these days. It's not a shame to lose an election. But it is a shame to serve a wrong idea -- which is what Republicans while in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, have been doing the past six years in education policy. Most recently, they have been seeking to reauthorize the Higher Education Act of 1965, the first and still the authoritative assertion of the modern bureaucratic state into higher learning.

A product of the Great Society, the Act provides direct aid from the federal government to colleges and universities and their students. With this aid comes rules, rules by the tens of thousands, rules beyond the knowing of any person. Every year these rules are adjusted, refined, forgotten, remembered, and reinterpreted in countless ways by countless people who feed at the public trough. But every five or six years, relatively major changes are made by several pieces of legislation. This is what is meant by reauthorization.

Conservatives, when they argue for school choice (a good cause), like to say that elementary and secondary schools should be financed on the same principles as colleges, where student aid follows the student to whichever school he pleases or prefers. This is true enough, but it is not the aid alone that follows the student. Title IV of the current Higher Education Act regulates colleges that accept federal student financial aid. Title IV includes now more than 300 pages of regulations, and the failure of a senior college official to comply in a material respect can lead to heavy fines and imprisonment.

This treatment of senior college officials seems like a good model for those in the Administration charged with enforcing compliance with the immigration laws.