Buried deep in President Bush's 2006 budget proposal is a seemingly small number that could have big implications for UB students. After a few years of marginal increases in the Federal Direct Loan program, the Bush Administration is cutting its funding by 1.2 percent, setting program funding back at least two years, according to most estimates. While on the surface this is a small decrease, it is yet another in a series of cuts to financial aid, cuts that are wreaking havoc on many students who are dependent on federal aid to pay their college bills.
Though the details of the federal loan cut have not yet been announced, it's clear that such a significant cut will have repercussions for many students who rely on Perkins, Parent PLUS, and Stafford Unsubsidized and Subsidized loans. Already the administration has made significant changes to the Pell Grant program, helping some by raising the maximum awards but completely taking the award from many others. Add to that a tuition increase of at least $500 for the 2005-2006 school year, and the cost of a SUNY education will be taking a steeper rise than nearly anyone would expect.
The Bush administration spin on the budget as a whole has been to cut what President Bush called unnecessary and ineffective programs to shrink the government and reduce the deficit. But even with all the cuts in programs, the President will not succeed in either respect. While many programs are facing elimination or funding reductions - such as agricultural subsidies, Medicaid and Medicare, Environmental Protection Agency, and the federal food stamp program - other departments that are considered essential to national security are seeing growth on the order of five percent and more. Shrinking non-defense programs can make the government seem smaller on paper, but when the defense department, which is by far the largest government agency, outpaces domestic spending so dramatically, the effect seems like an increase in the government's size and power.
As for cutting the deficit, the stark Bush budget seems to be a start in the right direction, but other Bush policies undercut any potential savings. President Bush's budget prunes spending while accounting for his tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 becoming permanent, but its increases in defense spending do not account for other big costs - additional billions spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the planned privatization of Social Security, a transition that could cost as much as $2 trillion, according to news sources. The net effect could add over $350 billion to the deficit, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The hardest pill to swallow with the 2006 Bush budget is how misleading it is. Many programs are being cut, but the administration says the cuts are necessary because more money needs to be spent on those who are in need. The trick is how the administration is redefining what "in need" really is. In reducing funding to the food stamp program, the Bush administration has said it is making the program more efficient, but what it really has done is make it harder to qualify for food stamps - allowing only those who receive cash welfare benefits, or those without jobs, to receive food stamps. Those who receive anything from childcare to housing yet have a job will not qualify, making it harder for those people to accumulate the savings to get off welfare altogether.
The Bush administration is making similar destructive changes as it cuts money for student loans. The problem with the loan cuts is that the Bush administration will most likely redefine who needs loans, shutting out many Americans who need the help. Hurting these people only rips out the safety net needed to cross the bridge from poverty to independence.
