Now that I have explored both sides of the debate on free-tuition, I am ready to give my opinion on what I think is best for our nation. Both sides have many appealing aspects. Everybody would love to graduate college and say they didn’t have to pay a dime towards tuition. However, there are many trade-offs to the general public, including enormous tax increases and potential for decreases in the overall quality of education that is being offered. To determine the right way to implement a solution for this civic issue, it is necessary to get down to the foundation of what problem this type of policy is trying to address. It seems the two main purposes of free tuition are: (1) to recruit top-tier talented minds from home and abroad to fill specialized careers that is or could be facing a shortage of workers and (2) to empower American students who are discouraged from continuing their education due to the high sticker price of attending college. With this in mind, I have come to the conclusion that something must be done, although universal free tuition is not the answer.
There are two solutions that I think would work well in addressing the concerns that are coming from both sides. First, I think there needs to be economic incentive to enter fields that teach the skills for careers paths that are supposed to have shortages of workers. For example, geriatric care has been identified as a field that will have significant labor shortages in the coming years as the Baby Boomer generation ages. One way the government can ensure that there will be enough professionals providing care to the aging population is to subsidize students’s education bills after graduating with a degree that would properly train them for a career in geriatrics. This framework could be applied generally to many different fields. Additionally, the subsidized tuition would be a great incentive for students who are interested in the field, but don’t think they can afford the cost of attending school. It also could incentivize bright students from other countries to study, and hopefully make a career, in the United States.
The second solution I am proposing already exists to a certain extent. Federal student aid is not currently providing enough to meet financial need. At Penn State, I am likely to graduate with more debt than if I were graduating from an Ivy League school. This is hard to imagine when the sticker price at Penn State is nearly half that of most of the ivy schools. However, one thing that Ivy schools do differently then public schools is meet 100% of financial need. Since these schools have a more realistic interpretation then the government of how much of my education I can pay for, it can be less expensive for most Americans to go to the Ivy schools. If the government actually made an effort to meet students’ individual financial needs, students would be able to graduate with less debt. This would certainly cause an increase in taxes, but it would not cause nearly as drastic of an increase as universal free tuition. For that reason, I believe this is a viable compromise between the two sides of the debate on free tuition.
Although free tuition is unfeasible, there are various other initiatives that can achieve the same goals, and require far fewer tax dollars. I am excited to see how this civic issue will affect legislative agenda in the near future as well as the Presidential race in 2020.