As always, we encourage you to read the entire piece, but here's a noteworthy excerpt:
While some critics claim that the excessive debt situation could be averted simply by the institutions themselves cutting their program costs, there is little to suggest that doing so would actually lower student borrowing. Meanwhile, it comes as no surprise that students with fewer financial resources borrow more and have a more difficult time paying their debts.
On the earnings end of gainful employment equation, again the logic is elusive. The current Department of Education proposal would tie its debt to earnings ratio to the income amounts reported by specific cohorts of students in the first years after attending specific programs. Doing so allows enormous variability into the formula. Those deciding not to work, to enter a different field, to join the military, to care for a sick relative, or to pursue other options throws a major wrench into the calculation, while the calculation itself fails to factor in the probability that earnings increase with years of experience.
It’s no accident that over 80,000 students, employers, institutions and other interested parties, including 80 members of Congress, have responded to the Department of Education’s gainful employment proposal, most negatively. Americans want choice. A recent survey commissioned by the Career College Association found that almost two thirds of adults surveyed think that the decision of how much debt one can take out to pay for education should be left up to the student.