The New York State Senate and Assembly heard arguments for public financing of elections, the best policy tool we have to push back against the presence of big money in politics and to push forward on the march toward racial equity.
Each year, Black History Month reminds us to do something we rarely do as a society: remember (or learn for the first time) and reflect on the truly breathtaking contributions of Black people over the centuries. Many outlets do a beautiful job of cataloging some of these contributions, including several of my colleagues here on this blog.
I grew up in a military family, and we lived in predominantly white cities. I spent most of my formative years in Lancaster, California. Lancaster was a true juxtaposition: it was a city in southern California, which was a region widely hailed for its progressive values. At the same time, Lancaster was more of a big town than a city, with a majority white population that held deep conservative beliefs.
Watching television can be a window into experiences beyond your own, but it shouldn't be a passive act—keep in mind who is controlling the race narrative.
Put simply, how do we square that “college is worth it” from the increasing body of evidence that student debt is not necessarily good debt? The unsatisfying answer, of course, is that it depends.
The media shouldn't be scaring students away from going to college, because the alternative of not going is worse. Unfortunately, our move to a debt-for-diploma system is doing a good enough job of that itself.
President Obama is expected to announce an Executive Order that would extend the protections of Income-Based Repayment (or more specifically, Pay As You Earn) to student borrowers who took out loans before 2007 or stopped borrowing by 2011.
In the wake of the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC, this amendment is a necessary counterbalance to the deluge of money that wealthy individuals, corporations and special interests have flooded into our elections.
Brookings Institution researchers Beth Akers and Matt Chingos set the internet in a tizzy today with some “counterintuitive” research on student debt, with the takeaway for some being that student debt is not, in fact, the burden that the media (and policymakers) would have you believe. There are some pretty big caveats to their findings.
Nestled in Part H (section 499!) in the Democrats’ laundry list of ideas is an idea that has by far the most potential to solve one of the most vexing problems in higher ed: the rising cost of college.
Nathan Kelly is an associate professor of political science at the University of Tennessee. His book, The Politics of Inequality in the United States, examines how politics affects the market distribution of income, as well as government redistribution. Kelly and I discuss the implications of his work at the intersection of economic and political inequality.
The state-appointed Detroit Emergency Manager has commenced a program of shutting off the water of a large portion of the 138,000 delinquent accounts, up to 90,000 of which are poor households and largely African-American.
"The steady erosion of state investment in public higher education over the last few decades reflects a stunning abdication of responsibility on the part of states to preserve college affordability."
Sticker price matters because sticker price inflation dictates how much the federal government spends. High sticker price is one of the main reasons the feds dole out almost $170 billion in grants, student loans, tax incentives, and work study money each year.