Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionsEducationStarted 7yrs agoActive 2hrs ago1 here now

Should the federal government pay for tuition at four-year colleges and universities?

A 2017 College Board study estimated that the cost of college has increased 100% since 2001. The St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank estimates that U.S. college tuition debt has increased from $480 billion in 2006 to $1.5 trillion in 2018. Several 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary candidates have argued that the cost of college is out of control and that the government should pay for tuition. Opponents argue that the government cant afford it and point to estimates from the Committee for a Responsible Federal budget that estimate programs would cost the government $80 billion a year.

+
Expand
+ Settings

Filter by type

Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.

Filter by author

Narrow down the conversation to these participants:

:

:

:

:

State:

Congressional District (2014-2024):

DMA:

State Senate District:

County:

Assembly District:

City:

Zipcode:

55.5k Replies

 @8V79WLGIndependent from Arizona  answered…5yrs5Y

Abolish Universities

 @94GXY72 from Pennsylvania  answered…4yrs4Y

No, and we should eliminate federal student loans to lower costs at institutions and interest rates on private loans.

 @Skiozzy from Georgia  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but with ongoing eligibility criteria to ensure students want to be there and apply themselves.

 @8ZVZM4X from Florida  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, and in additional benefits could be added with that such as food and books, then yes.

 @8ZRC53Kfrom Florida  answered…4yrs4Y

No, but create more scholarships for members of all the economic classes

 @8ZM96C4 from North Carolina  answered…4yrs4Y

no, this should be an issue for the states

 @8Z349SJ from Texas  answered…4yrs4Y

No, this will cause the cost of getting an education to rise and will create more problems then it would solve. The free market is the best solution to education. What the government needs to do is deregulate colleges and make it easier for them to become accredited so we have more competition in the marketplace which will result in a lower cost of getting educated.

 @8Y5F6WQIndependent from Texas  answered…4yrs4Y

No, but make trade schools have public ally funded tuitions where upon graduation, you work for the city in your field of study for 6 years where at the end, you may remain but with promotion and greater benefits, or to leave and use your skill and experience in private business.

 @8XZKPZJ from Oregon  answered…5yrs5Y

Free college? I'm down for that!

 @jniz73 from Connecticut  answered…5yrs5Y

Yes, each state should have one or multiple colleges and universities that are free.

 @8XDX6X5 from Pennsylvania  answered…5yrs5Y

No, but the government should fund free community college

 @8WGLY3Cfrom Guam  answered…5yrs5Y

Yes, but a well regulated expenditure that reduces student expenses to a great extent. Scholarship opportunities should be increased for all students.

 @8VC92MX from Virginia  answered…5yrs5Y

Yes, if they graduate college

 @8S4KZRQfrom Guam  answered…5yrs5Y

Yes, but apply strict standards and selection, only the ones who will succeed gets scholarsip

 @8RHM8TT from New Jersey  answered…5yrs5Y

The government needs to stop subsidizing universities, which allows them to raise costs

 @99K4BNT from Texas  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, if the individual is willing to submit to a slightly raised tax percentage for a reasonable and fixed period of time after graduation.

 @995FWZK from California  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes but only if the degree is actually a useful one

 @994ZSSBRepublican from Missouri  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, somewhat, interest rate should be brought down, and some grants should be made, and low income students should be funded more

 @994RTK4answered…3yrs3Y

Yes because some people may be struggling without a good paying job and if they go to collage for at least three years then they may get a good job and be able to pay for the rest of their collage years.

 @98FCN7XGreen from Minnesota  answered…3yrs3Y

depending on the people that going to college if its a person that deserves to go to college but can't affored it then the government should pay for it

 @98D8276 from Maryland  answered…3yrs3Y

No, but the states should

 @986PGJF from Virginia  answered…4yrs4Y

I think a college education should be free to everyone, but I can see the benefits of paying student loans because it can teach students how to manage their money. Also, I think low-income students should get more scholarship opportunities.

 @983XDR3 from Missouri  answered…4yrs4Y

I think that there should be more scholarship opportunities for low-income students and lower interest rates for student loans.

 @97ZQB3CIndependent from Oklahoma  answered…4yrs4Y

No, and should increase the requirements for federal aid

 @97J3LLR from Illinois  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but educational requirements should be more stringent, so students aren’t monetized and only the most qualified students pursue advanced education.

 @97HZGJVConstitution from Iowa  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but only to cover partial tuition assistance for associate degrees and trade schools. Universities need to be regulated and monitored regarding tuition. Also, predatory loan servicers need to be eliminated.

 @97G979B from Missouri  answered…4yrs4Y

Trade school should be paid for, not college or university

 @97CLS7RIndependent from Nevada  answered…4yrs4Y

If anything, handing out money or forgiving student loans can be helpful to individuals, it does not solve the problem of the cost of college or student loans. So... maybe do something to fix that than throw money at people and decrease the price of these things altogether. Fix the problem at the source.

 @Colbs887 from Kansas  answered…4yrs4Y

yes, but only partial tuition for public service employees

 @96V859MRepublican from Florida  answered…4yrs4Y

No, but tuition cost needs to be cut and price ceilings should be put in place for public universities and proceed to only increase at the same rate as inflation

 @96V25CP from California  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but only for those worthy and perusing a dream in a field of study

 @96T386TIndependent from California  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but only for trade schools, sectors in which we need more workers, and for low income students

 @96NBGS6 from North Carolina  answered…4yrs4Y

NO but make it cheaper provide more opportunities for low income students as well as provide more scholar ship opportunities

 @8YBNPJMIndependence from Illinois  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes but only if its in state and public

 @8XRQY53 from Idaho  answered…5yrs5Y

University prices should be government regulated in order to ensure a more fair price and student loan interest rates should be lowered

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies