American public higher education should be pragmatically supported, not illegitimately 'loan-forgiven' or 'tuition-free'

It's no secret the cost of American higher education is high and rising, seemingly exponentially so, as generations of students continue to rack up record levels of debt. Unfortunately, one objectively unsustainable policy proposal continues to gain significant attention and uninformed support. If enacted, it will inevitably cost much more than politically advertised.

INTRODUCTION

Many Americans choose to pursue education beyond high school in order to earn or sustain generational wealth or financial stability, giving their bloodline presumed economic and social advantages. Explaining this national reality more deeply: Educational pursuit is a social bedrock of any capitalist system, as creativity, innovation, advanced social skills, topical awareness, and more are key components of both educational pursuit and capitalism, and the pursuit of knowledge is sociologically innate! Educational pursuit will forever remain comfortably at the core of the "American Dream." Unfortunately, as the consumer costs of higher education continue to rise, infinitely surpassing the rate of inflation, the societal transfer of knowledge is becoming collectively, detrimentally limited.?So, where does this leave Americans actively pursuing their version of the American Dream?

According to the New York Fed's Center for Microeconomic Data,?roughly 70 percent of?American students?took out loans to attend college last year , and the average American graduate leaves?school?with about $30,000 in?debt. All told, approximately 45 million?Americans?owe roughly $1.6 trillion in?student?loans today. With?record numbers ?of young adults choosing to further their education regardless of the financial risk, millions of our future innovators, economic contributors, societal leaders are burdened with a?daunting mountain of student debt. America is faced with this legitimate, unsustainable, domestic challenge with serious economic and social implications, in addition to the constant, weighty responsibility of maintaining a vital, geopolitical leadership position, both economically and socially, effectively setting the economic and moral standard for politics and production in the "Free World."

While many Americans take a confident financial leap toward furthering their formal education, risking their very socioeconomic status, often with no means to compensate for the exponentially rising cost of this pursuit, others are left hopelessly nostalgic for a time when American social mobility was more commonplace. The admittedly generalized latter are too often discouraged from advancing their educational status quo whatsoever, and generational stagnation unfortunately wins the day. Encapsulating both of these realities, is the devolutionary fact that American social mobility is becoming increasingly rare.

Ultimately, the unaffordability of higher education directly affects millions of hard-working Americans who admirably prioritize educational advancement. Yet, public institutions "from sea to shining sea" continue to increase the cost of college tuition. As a result, access to higher education is becoming increasingly limited. The significance of the American Dream — its generally accepted, minimum standard, transference, diversity, and broadness of applicability — is arguably diminishing before our very eyes.

Fortunately, a collective emphasis on less-costly and more societally beneficial alternatives to higher education — such as career-technical-education and trade-school pathways, internships, apprenticeships, employer-educator partnership academies, and more — and a slow but steady, nationally ubiquitous increase in federal, state, and local government and nonprofit support of policies, programs, and initiatives that fuel career-connected learning have provided a glimmer of hope for a sustainable future. Additionally, an elephant-in-the-room broader context of American workforce shortages across industries, primarily due to long-term, global demographic shifts (most notably declining birthrates), have led to a necessary but refreshing increase in industry-education collaboration.

The negative stigma associated with career-technical education is finally becoming less prominent. Furthermore, many of the most popular industries lending themselves to the aforementioned, laudable pathways — like construction, manufacturing, and other hands-on trades — are significantly, positively impacted by both technological advancement and, more intentionally, our international policy experts' long-term reshoring efforts due to geopolitical pressures and unrest abroad. The day-to-day tasks within these industry sectors in particular is so impacted by technology, the work itself is practically unrecognizable from the required tasks undertaken even one decade ago, and it requires an entirely different, or at least additional, more tech-savvy, skillset. The training itself is vastly different!

Every American industry has become more tech-infused as our modern economy continues to evolve, and career-connected learning has become a welcome workforce solution to this rapid economic evolution. Unfortunately, even these educational options are becoming more expensive and less accessible. As the importance of short-term credentialing and career-connected learning has finally, seemingly resonated with American educators, students, parents and grandparents, career-technical schools now find themselves at capacity, with far too many students who are willing and pre-qualified to embrace these pathways and learn career-applicable, hands-on skills on waitlists for career-tech admission or denied and turned away, back to their traditional/home high school.

Furthermore, the numerous, negative effects of the outrageously high and exponentially rising cost of higher educational pursuit can overshadow the established significance of working to earn an education in the first place. This, in turn, could eventually upend societal progress altogether. For a nation proudly, and sustainably, defined by work ethic and colloquial bootstraps, it should be counterintuitive to turn away from Americans willing to earn and learn in the name of convenience. Unfortunately, this has not been the American experience.

With record numbers?of young adults choosing to further their education regardless of the financial risk, millions of our future innovators, economic contributors, societal leaders are burdened with a?daunting mountain of student debt.

Inevitably, Congress will be forced to act on this increasingly prevalent issue.?As we collectively continue to examine potential solutions to the unaffordability of higher education in America, one seemingly shortsighted path forward has been repeatedly espoused and advocated by many progressive elected officials and self-described "democratic socialists":?Why not just make college 'tuition-free,' or forgive student loan debt altogether?

Even the hypothetical implementation of this policy proposal includes several obvious shortcomings; yet, considering the attention it continues to garner — undoubtedly due to its promotional simplicity and attractive, utopian allusions — it is certainly worth a brief, cautionary examination.

In a society that offers a 100-percent, government-funded system of higher education, each of the following must be true:

1) The education being offered cannot truly be “free” — this is to say: offered at no cost or 'loan-forgiven.'

University faculty and staff must be compensated in some way, regardless.?Karl Marx was incorrect: Individualism is, in fact, an important characteristic of human nature. Utopia is ultimately unattainable. Competition is sociologically innate. Further, individual survival and familial- and self-interest are leading, naturally embedded, motivating factors of the human experience. Through the evolution of human civilization,?our?society has come to realize that the monetary exchange of goods and services is simply the safest and most productive manner by which to structure society. Alternatively, we human beings might be naturally inclined to embark upon the competitive crusade for survival, security, and/or individuality by seeking societal superiority in some other form, i.e. popularity, religious authority, military utility, etc. Thus, establishing strong financial incentives toward lifelong, personal achievements — like well-funded, well-rounded, earned educational pursuit — is optimal.

Formal educators provide an invaluable service to a capitalist society, effectively securing an intellectual future. They deserve to be rewarded accordingly. Compensation must derive from the consumers themselves —students — in some form, whether paid directly to the bursar or through a government conduit via tax collection and redistribution. Should the latter become a universal reality, the high cost of education in America would in no way be mitigated. Ipso?facto: "Free" higher education is not actually free, and it does nothing to lower costs. Instead, this verbiage simply speaks to an alteration of how educational pursuit is compensated.

2) Education, as a concept, is inevitably devalued.

If no genuine, individual effort is involved in one personally earning enough money to obtain a college degree for themselves proactively, eventually, an American university diploma will merit the equivalence of a G.E.D., and an ultimately less-formally-educated society would certainly result. In effect,?"free" higher education devalues education as a concept, as the cumulative effort involved in obtaining a diploma — even if it is of less tangible value to society — would of course become diminished. Again, competition is humanly innate. If university diplomas became omnipresent, the differentiation of earned merit would become an issue within the context of educational pursuit, and the educational standard of earned merit itself, would certainly be questioned.

3) Work itself is disincentivized, and both the individual and collective desire for work is significantly diminished.

To date, generations of Americans have worked earnestly for the ability to pursue higher education, whether via scholarship — academic or athletic — or through, most naturally, workforce participation.?Barry Schwartz's ?Why We Work ?(2015) and many similar pieces regarding the importance of work, merit, and principle in American society speak to this point.?To enact government policy ensuring the privilege of higher educational pursuit without any direct, individual monetary cost — or any genuine effort required on the part of the individual student — would be to institute an irreverent degree of injustice to those who previously sought employment and labored first to earn enough money in our capitalist society in order to earn their degree.?This posits retroactive compensation for "earn-to-learn" individuals, many of whom are forced to sustain multiple jobs simultaneously in order to earn enough money to obtain a degree, or send their children to college.

4.) The economy at large suffers, if not immediately, eventually.

Fewer individuals incentivized to participate in the American workforce to earn enough money to pursue higher education would mean fewer individuals actively involved in the workforce altogether. A government-paid system of higher education in America could utterly upend our economy, disregarding entirely the intricate balance between consumption and production. Thus,?"free" American higher education would be disadvantageous for the entire global economy!

CONCLUSION

As the cost of higher education in America continues to skyrocket, the urgency to publicly compromise on a legitimate, sustainable solution to at least mitigate the many effects of this exponentially rising cost becomes more prevalent by the day. Unfortunately, the loud and simple sales pitches for an entirely government-funded system of higher education are nothing more than the soundbites that define them. To broadly summarize an overarching, but pertinent point: The intricacies of incentive are too often overlooked in policymaking generally, competition is innate in human nature, and?—?contrary to popular belief —?nothing is "free," not even higher education.

Derek Chancellor is a graduate of the University of South Dakota's Public Administration master's program. Prior to earning his MPA, Derek earned Bachelor of Science degrees in History and Political Science, both, also, from USD. After serving the residents of Vermillion, South Dakota, from the City Manager's Office in City Hall, Derek moved to Washington, D.C., where he expanded his public-service reach to all South Dakota residents as a health care, labor, pension, welfare, and adoption policy staffer for U.S. Senate Majority Whip John Thune on Capitol Hill. After three years in the U.S. Senate, Derek accepted a marketing and communications opportunity to serve high-profile clients and their teams nationwide — including seated governors and members of Congress — as a digital marketing manager for one of the most respected political research, planning, placement, communications, and implementation agencies in the United States, National Media. In 2020, Derek moved to Cincinnati, Ohio. He now serves Southwest Ohio residents as a Regional Liaison for Ohio's 66th Lt. Governor, Jon Husted.