The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives passed similar budgets this past week aimed at reducing the federal deficit, but critics say the plans would harm students by slashing Pell Grant funding.
The budgets each cut roughly $5 trillion in federal spending over the next decade. The Senate and House are aiming to agree on the specifics of the budget and submit it to President Obama by April 15.
Republicans, who control both chambers, believe reducing the size of the federal government will take the burden off taxpayers.
“The cuts are necessary to prevent any more tax increases,” said Breyer Hillegas, president of this university’s College Republicans chapter. “The American taxpayers are already exploited enough by the overweight federal government. … This budget bill makes Washington live within its means.”
But the House budget would freeze the maximum Pell Grant award at $5,775 for the next 10 years, though state budget cuts and inflation continue to drive up tuition and other living costs.
Since the inception of Pell Grants, the maximum award has gone up annually either through legislative action or by indexing the grants to inflation, said David Reich, a senior policy consultant at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan organization.
“Saying no more increases is quite a step,” Reich said. “Even though one would hope the cost of tuition will rise more slowly, I don’t think anybody expects the cost of tuition to stop rising at all. That just means this is going to cover a smaller and smaller share.”
Currently, the maximum grant award covers about 30 percent of the average cost of a four-year public university. The 10-year freeze would bring that level to roughly 20 percent by 2025.
In 1980, Pell Grants covered about 70 percent of the cost of college.
The budget also eliminates $90 billion in mandatory spending on Pell Grants over the next decade, which Reich said is an even more drastic measure than freezing the maximum award.
This measure would create an immediate funding shortfall for Pell Grants that would have to be made up in annual appropriations, Reich said, likely forcing Congress to scale back the scope of the grant program.
“Would they result in reduced eligibility, fewer students receiving Pell Grants, or would they come from reduced grant levels?” Reich said. “Probably both.”
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, called the budget a “moral document” during a conference call with college newspapers this past week.
“A budget is a document that really lays out where your priorities are,” Wasserman Schultz said. “In this case, it is abundantly clear where the GOP has laid theirs. In exchange for tax cuts for the wealthy and big corporations, they want to throw young people off their health insurance and gut Pell Grants for low- and middle-income families.”
Hillegas said Republicans prioritized programs such as Social Security and national defense, which he said will have a greater impact on Americans.
“The cuts had to be made somewhere, and I guess the lawmakers feel Pell Grants is one area where drastic cuts could be used to decrease government spending,” Hillegas said. “It’s a shame that we have to make cuts, but they have to be made somewhere, and we have to make them in places that we think will have the least amount of negative effect on the entire country.”
