S24: The LEARN Act of 2017

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

Just a few comments (apologies if I made some incorrect assumptions or am overlooking something that has already been stated in older legislation):

1) West's rationale for removing the 'community college' segment was that community college is already covered for the poor under FAFSA (presumably in the form of the RL Pell grants, as no other thread in the AFG board mentions the FAFSA). However, to receive such a grant, one must have a high school diploma or GED certificate. This requirement was removed from the LEARN act (without any stated rationale), meaning the requirements to receive a Pell grant are different than the requirements to apply for aid under the LEARN act (?).

2) What exactly constitutes 'pursuing a degree in...'? How does an applicant prove that he/she is pursuing a degree in one of the subjects listed? Many public colleges accept undeclared applicants, and students are allowed to enroll in a particular major program any time before the end of sophomore year. If, for instance, a college freshman is undeclared, will he/she be ineligible for free tuition? What if a college freshman is 'pursuing a degree in,' say, history, and then changes majors after receiving a few years of free tuition?

3) As Leinad said, this needs a sliding scale.

4) What is the rationale for only listing non-STEM majors?

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

I think putting the "Diploma or GED" requirement back in for public 4/y universities would be alright.

We can do this, it just seems unnecessary considering that a diploma or GED would be under the requirements to attend a four-year (or a community college) anyway (and meeting the requirements to attend is already part of the bill).

Encke: STEM majors are excluded, in favor of STEM-major students pursuing education at vocational and trade schools, in place of sending all students to four-years in order to reduce the total cost of the bill.

I'm open to amendment to correct grammar, and to clarify that students have to announce their major upon application to a four-year. Students' aid will also be severed, should they switch to a non-covered major (but I don't think they should have to pay back for the year/years that were covered prior to switching majors).

There is no such thing as STEM education at a vocational school, as vocational schools teach practical, not conceptual, skills. Encouraging STEM-inclined students to attend vocational schools is a bad idea, because eventually students who want to major in STEM fields will end up exploiting the four-year provisions to get their first two years paid for.

I move that by unanimous consent West_Midlander's amendment be adopted and that we move immediately afterwards to a final vote.

You're going to move to a final vote without a cost analysis?

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

Another comment: This act, as I see it, provides the tuition benefits to anyone who meets the requirements and is entering a Southern trade/vocational school or a four-year university. However, there doesn't seem to be any requirement for Southern residency.

Public schools separate in-region and out-of-region tuition. State (regional) schools also have residency requirements (typically one year of residence in the given region) for establishing in-region or out-of-region rates. This means that, under this act, it would be possible for students who are not residents of the South to come here for schooling, thus receiving a 40% discount on the larger, out-of-state tuition rate, greatly driving up the cost of the act.