![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
|
|||
|
Should federal borrowing limits for students who attend the nation’s colleges, universities and vocational schools be lifted or remain at the levels last set by Congress in 1992? |
Borrower Loan Limits: Key Reauthorization Topic To frame the debate, here are some of the arguments on both sides of the issue.
Where do these discussion points lead in this debate? A number of different options, outside of leaving the current limits intact, have been proposed. The National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA) in 2002 proposed increasing undergraduate loan limits to $7,000 annually and graduate loan limits to $10,000. Under this proposal, undergraduate students would have a uniform $7,000 loan limit instead of the graduated limits (from $2,625 to $5,500) in place right now. In contrast, the American Association of Community Colleges and some student groups are advocating for no change in the current limits. Flexibility in imposing the annual loan limits is one option that has been proposed by other groups. This would allow students to borrow more than the current annual loan limits in their first two years, but not allow them to borrow more than the current aggregate limit over their college career. The American Council on Education (ACE), the umbrella advocacy group for higher education associations, has asked Congress for an adjustment in the loan limits to recognize changes in the cost of living, which would increase the current aggregate limit from $23,000 to $30,000 and allow first-year students to borrow up to $4,000. But in a nod to the community college and state college associations, the ACE also recommends the exploration of loan limits that are related to students’ “unmet financial need” after institutional costs and student aid have been considered. Some community colleges in the western U.S. have called for allowing each college to set its own lower loan limit if necessary as a way of accommodating the need to higher loan limits in some other institutions. Most advocates also agree that if loan limits are increased, repayment plans must be more flexible and offer borrowers the opportunity to reduce their monthly payment. While these issues will be debated by members of Congress in the upcoming reauthorization, one thing is abundantly clear – loan counseling and good repayment experiences are critical for borrowers and essential to default prevention. It remains to be seen whether loan limit changes will add to the task of making sure that borrowers understand and fulfill their loan obligations and simultaneously realize their educational aspirations. EdFund/CSAC Recommendation on Loan Limits © 2004 EdFund For more information on EdFund, contact Michael Amaloo, Client Relations Manager at: P.O. Box 566, Kyle TX 78640. Telephone: Toll Free 1.866.299.1741 or 512.405.3800 Fax: 512.405.3801 |