ReportWire

Tag: miguel cardona

  • Education Secretary Calls Diversity Program Cuts Latest ‘Boogeyman’ To Divide Schools

    Education Secretary Calls Diversity Program Cuts Latest ‘Boogeyman’ To Divide Schools

    WASHINGTON ― U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said Tuesday that he believes attacks on diversity programs in public schools are part of a larger campaign to “decrease the confidence in our public schools.”

    In a roundtable discussion with Black journalists at the Department of Education building in Washington, Cardona referred to the rollback as a “boogeyman” that opponents of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives have created to sow division in America’s schools — not unlike the debates over COVID masks and the teaching of critical race theory.

    “There are very deliberate attempts to seek division in our schools so that a private option sounds better for parents. So we created a boogeyman,” Cardona said. “Four years ago were the masks. [Critical race theory] was a year after that. [Now,] DEI, banning books. Every year, there’s something to stoke division in an attempt to disrupt our public schools and decrease the confidence in our public schools.”

    Since the beginning of 2023, more than 70 pieces of legislation targeting diversity programs at colleges and universities have been introduced, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education. Public schools in Texas, Florida and other Republican-controlled states have been forced to limit student access to certain books by Black authors. Cardona said he sees the rollback of diversity efforts across public education as a “deliberate” attempt to prevent schools from being inclusive places for all students.

    “The attack on DEI, to me, is a deliberate attack on efforts to try to make sure schools are inclusive, welcoming places for all students — in particular, students from different backgrounds,” the education secretary said. “No different than what I think happened when the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action.”

    Cardona’s belief that the goal is to undermine confidence in public education has been underlined by remarks from conservative activists such as Christopher Rufo, who is behind many of the attacks on DEI. Rufo has been blunt about his desire to create “universal public school distrust” as a way to promote funding for school choice.

    In September, the Department of Education released recommendations to help colleges and universities improve diversity on campuses following the high court’s June gutting of affirmative action in admissions. Emboldened by the court’s decision to end most college affirmative action programs, anti-DEI activists are waging legal wars on diversity initiatives at private businesses and foundations as well.

    “Every year, there’s something to stoke division in an attempt to disrupt our public schools and decrease the confidence in our public schools.”

    – Education Secretary Miguel Cardona

    Cardona said he believes these DEI programs are critical to help students of color feel supported by their institutions. “My rationale around these programs is they make students feel seen, welcome and [can] unapologetically be themselves. The dismantling of those programs, in my opinion, reduces schools’ abilities to provide an inclusive environment for students to learn.”

    The battle over diversity, equity and inclusion programs is largely fought at the state level, with Republican politicians, such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, leading the charge. Cardona acknowledged that states and localities take the lead on how state-funded schools are run.

    “I cannot tell schools you have to have a DEI program, but I could, through data, demonstrate if there’s a decrease in students who have access based on race. And I can attribute that to some of the lack of inclusivity or attacks that maybe students feel there,” he said.

    The education secretary said that his department and the Department of Justice are actively investigating school districts that are systematically ignoring the civil rights of their students.

    “We see deliberate attempts to go after LGBTQ students in our country. We see leaders saying that slavery was a skilled program that people left with skills to do better. We see the majority of banned books having protagonists of color. We see AP Black History under attack,” Cardona said. “It’s very deliberate, very intentional.”

    “It’s getting worse because what people used to do in the shade, they’re now doing in the sunlight,” he said.

    Source link

  • The Biden Administration Is Trying To Forgive More Student Loans

    The Biden Administration Is Trying To Forgive More Student Loans

    The Biden administration is proposing student loan relief for several more categories of borrowers in an effort to chip away at the nation’s enormous student debt problem after the Supreme Court squashed a broad plan to do so this summer.

    The Department of Education released the proposal Monday. It would provide debt relief for four groups: people who “currently have outstanding federal student loan balances that exceed what they originally borrowed,” people who have loans that are more than 25 years past the start of their repayment date, people who “took out loans to attend career-training programs that created unreasonable debt loads or provided insufficient earnings for graduates,” and people who are eligible for forgiveness but have not proactively applied for it.

    A fifth group of people who are experiencing financial hardship is also under consideration.

    The proposal would build on other debt relief initiatives that have helped nearly 3.6 million borrowers wipe away a total of $127 billion so far, according to the Department of Education.

    Instead of resting on the HEROES Act like Biden’s first plan, which tied debt relief to the pandemic, the new proposal leans on the Higher Education Act.

    A committee of negotiators will discuss the proposal at hearings scheduled Nov. 6 and 7 and Dec. 11 and 12.

    “President Biden and I are committed to helping borrowers who’ve been failed by our country’s broken and unaffordable student loan system,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said in a statement.

    While President Joe Biden attempted to offer up to $20,000 of student debt relief to a broad swath of borrowers last year, lawsuits brought by conservative groups put an end to that plan.

    Source link

  • Affirmative action for white people? Legacy college admissions come under renewed scrutiny

    Affirmative action for white people? Legacy college admissions come under renewed scrutiny

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The next big fight over college admissions already has taken hold, and it centers on a different kind of minority group that gets a boost: children of alumni.

    In the wake of a Supreme Court decision that strikes down affirmative action in admissions, colleges are coming under renewed pressure to put an end to legacy preferences — the practice of favoring applicants with family ties to alumni. Long seen as a perk for the white and wealthy, opponents say it’s no longer defensible in a world with no counterbalance in affirmative action.

    President Joe Biden suggested colleges should rethink the practice after the court’s ruling, saying legacy preferences “expand privilege instead of opportunity.” Several Democrats in Congress demanded an end to the policy in light of the court’s decision to remove race from the admissions process. So did Republicans including Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, who is vying for the GOP presidential nomination.

    “Let’s be clear: affirmative action still exists for white people. It’s called legacy admissions,” Rep. Barbara Lee, a California Democrat, said on Twitter.

    For critics of legacy admissions, the renewed debate over fairness in admissions has offered a chance to swing public sentiment behind their cause.

    As colleges across the U.S. pledge their commitment to diversity following the court’s ruling, activists have a simple response: prove it. If schools want to enroll more Black, Hispanic and Indigenous students, activists say, removing legacy preferences would be an easy first step.

    “Now more than ever, there’s no justification for allowing this process to continue,” said Viet Nguyen, a graduate of Brown and Harvard who leads Ed Mobilizer, a nonprofit that has fought legacy preferences since 2018. “No other country in the world does legacy preferences. Now is a chance to catch up with the rest of the world.”

    Using the Supreme Court decision as a catalyst, Nguyen’s group is rallying the alumni of top colleges to press their alma maters to end the practice. The goal is to get graduates of the 30 schools to withhold donations until the policy ends. The schools include Harvard and the University of North Carolina, which were at the center of the court case, along with the rest of the Ivy League and the University of Southern California.

    It builds on other efforts taking aim at the practice. Colorado banned it at public universities in 2021, and lawmakers in Connecticut, Massachusetts and New York have introduced similar bills. In Congress, Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York and Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, both Democrats, are reviving legislation that would forbid it at all universities that accept federal money.

    Legacy preferences have become an easy target in the wake of a Supreme Court decision that hinged on questions of merit in the college application process, said Julie Park, who studies college admissions and racial equity at the University of Maryland. Instead of getting in on their own merit, she said, legacy students are just “standing on their parents’ shoulders.”

    “It’s just low-hanging fruit,” she said. “People want something to do, and there’s a strong rationale to get rid of it.”

    Secretary Miguel Cardona urged colleges to “ask themselves the tough questions,” adding that legacy admissions and other types of special treatment “have long denied well-qualified students of all backgrounds a level playing field.”

    “In the wake of this ruling, they could further tip the scales against students who already have the cards stacked against them,” Cardona said in a statement to The Associated Press.

    In the hazy world of college admissions, it’s unclear exactly which schools provide a legacy boost and how much it helps. In California, where state law requires schools to disclose the practice, USC reported that 14% of last year’s admitted students had family ties to alumni or donors. Stanford reported a similar rate.

    At Harvard, which released years of records as part of the lawsuit that ended up before the Supreme Court, legacy students were eight times more likely to be admitted, and nearly 70% were white, researchers found.

    An Associated Press survey of the nation’s most selective colleges last year found that legacy students in the freshman class ranged from 4% to 23%. At four schools — Notre Dame, USC, Cornell and Dartmouth — legacy students outnumbered Black students.

    Supporters of the policy say it builds an alumni community and encourages donations. A 2022 study of an undisclosed college in the Northeast found that legacy students were more likely to make donations, but at a cost to diversity — the vast majority were white.

    Some prestigious colleges have abandoned the policy in recent years, including Amherst College and Johns Hopkins University. In the first year after dropping it, Amherst saw its share of legacy students in the freshman class fall by about half, while 19% of first-year students were the first in their families to attend college, the most in the school’s history.

    Some colleges argue that, as their student bodies become more racially diverse, the benefits of legacy status will extend to more students of color. Opponents argue that white families still have an advantage, with generations of relatives who had access to any college.

    Ivory Toldson went to college at Louisiana State University, but it wasn’t an option for his parents in the Jim Crow South.

    “My parents couldn’t legally go to LSU. Discrimination is a lot more recent in our history than a lot of people seem to understand,” said Toldson, a Howard University professor and the director of education, innovation and research for the NAACP.

    Toldson said there’s growing awareness of the irony that preferences for athletes and legacy students are still allowed, while race must be ignored.

    In May, an AP-NORC poll found that few Americans think legacy admissions or donations should play much of a role in college admissions. Just 9% say it should be very important that a family member attended and 18% say it should be somewhat important. Likewise, only 10% say donations to the school should be very important and 17% say that should be somewhat important.

    That same poll found that most Americans support affirmative action in higher education but think race should play a small role. Sixty-three percent said the Supreme Court should not block colleges from considering race in admissions, but 68% said it should not be a big factor.

    Several colleges declined to say whether they will continue providing a boost for legacy students next year, including Cornell and the University of Notre Dame.

    Meanwhile, Nguyen said he’s more optimistic than ever. In the past, colleges have been reluctant to be among the first to make the change, he said. Now he thinks that’s changing.

    “In the next few months, I think the hesitancy will actually be who will be the last,” he said. “No university wants to be the last.”

    ___

    The Associated Press education team receives support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    Source link

  • Education Secretary Rips Loan-Forgiven Republicans After College Debt Ruling

    Education Secretary Rips Loan-Forgiven Republicans After College Debt Ruling

    Cardona, who criticized the Supreme Court for ruling “against students and families across the country,” argued that the conservative court substituted itself for Congress before he then went after the GOP.

    “It’s outrageous to me that Republicans in Congress and state offices fought so hard against a program that would have helped millions of their own constituents,” Cardona said.

    “They had no problem handing trillion-dollar tax cuts to big corporations and the super wealthy, and many had no problems accepting millions of dollars in forgiven pandemic loans.”

    Cardona called out Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), who took out Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans during the COVID-19 pandemic and saw the federal government forgive more than $1.4 million of the debt.

    “He represents 489,000 eligible borrowers that were turned down today,” Cardona said.

    He also took aim at Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who saw the federal government forgive more than $180,000 of her PPP loans and who represents 91,800 student borrowers who would have been eligible for debt forgiveness under Biden’s plan, and Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), who had more than $4.4 million in loans forgiven and who represents 90,000 eligible student borrowers.

    Cardona said that he would join Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris in continuing to fight for college loan relief for student borrowers.

    “You should be able to earn a college education without student debt blocking you from opportunity,” he said.

    Source link

  • How did each Supreme Court justice vote in today’s student loan forgiveness ruling? Here’s a breakdown

    How did each Supreme Court justice vote in today’s student loan forgiveness ruling? Here’s a breakdown

    The Supreme Court decided 6-3 that the Biden administration does not have the authority to wipe out nearly half-a-trillion dollars in student debt.

    The decision denies relief to about 40 million Americans who stood to have up to $20,000 in student debt erased by the plan using the HEROES Act. 

    There were actually two student loan forgiveness decisions made on Friday: The first was about whether two private citizens had the right to challenge the plan. The court unanimously said that the pair did not have standing, and their challenge was thrown out. 

    However, in the case where the decision to strike down the forgiveness plan was made, the court said that Missouri — one of six states that challenged the plan — did have legal standing. This allowed the court to consider whether the secretary of education could use the HEROES Act to forgive student loan debt. 

    Here’s how the court voted on that case. 

    Supreme Court justices who voted against student loan forgiveness

    The Supreme Court’s decision fell along ideological lines, much like Thursday’s decision to end race-based affirmative action. 

    Chief Justice John Roberts voted against the student loan forgiveness plan and delivered the majority opinion, saying that U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona has the authority to “waive or modify” the HEROES Act, but not “rewrite that statute from the ground up.” 

    “The Secretary’s comprehensive debt cancellation plan cannot fairly be called a waiver—it not only nullifies existing provisions, but augments and expands them dramatically. It cannot be mere modification, because it constitutes ‘effectively the introduction of a whole new regime,’” Roberts wrote. 

    Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett voted with Roberts.

    Barrett filed a concurring opinion, writing that the court “can uphold the Secretary of Education’s loan cancellation program only if he points to ‘clear congressional authorization’ for it.” 

    Supreme Court justices who voted to uphold student loan forgiveness

    The court’s three liberal voices — Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson — all opposed the decision. Kagan filed a dissent where she called the decision to take up the case, let alone vote on it, an “overreach.” 

    “The plaintiffs in this case are six States that have no personal stake in the Secretary’s loan forgiveness plan,” Kagan wrote. “They are classic ideological plaintiffs: They think the plan a very bad idea, but they are no worse off because the Secretary differs. In giving those States a forum — in adjudicating their complaint — the Court forgets its proper role. The Court acts as though it is an arbiter of political and policy disputes, rather than of cases and controversies.”

    In the dissent, Kagan wrote that Cardona acted within the “broad authority” provided by the HEROES Act, saying that the decision to alter usual rules “fits comfortably within” the parameters set by the statute. 

    Melissa Quinn contributed to this report.

    Kerry Breen


    Kerry Breen

    Kerry Breen is a news editor and reporter for CBS News. Her reporting focuses on current events, breaking news and substance use.

    Source link

  • Biden Administration Approves Loan Relief Applicants Amid Pending Program Appeal

    Biden Administration Approves Loan Relief Applicants Amid Pending Program Appeal

    The Biden administration started contacting students who have been approved for student loan debt relief, CNN reported on Saturday. The move comes on the heels of the administration’s request for the Supreme Court to lift the nationwide injunction on the loan relief program.

    According to emails acquired by CNN, Department of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona sent emails on Saturday to those who have been approved for loan debt relief. The administration’s student loan debt relief program has been facing numerous legal challenges since its launch last month, which Cardona addressed in the emails.

    “Unfortunately, a number of lawsuits have been filed challenging the program, which have blocked our ability to discharge your debt at present. We believe strongly that the lawsuits are meritless, and the Department of Justice has appealed on our behalf,” Cardona said in the emails to students approved for the loan relief, CNN reported.

    The highly-anticipated student loan forgiveness program offers $10,000 of federal student debt cancellations to qualified loan borrowers. But the government stopped accepting applications on Nov. 10 after a Texas federal judge struck down the plan, deeming it “unconstitutional.”

    “We believe strongly that the Biden-Harris Student Debt Relief Plan is lawful and necessary to give borrowers and working families breathing room as they recover from the pandemic and to ensure they succeed when repayment restarts,” Cardona said in a recent press release.

    According to the Associated Press, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a nationwide injunction of the plan earlier this week after six Republican-led states challenged the plan. The Department of Justice filed a request on behalf of the Biden administration on Friday asking the Supreme Court to lift the hold on the plan while the legal proceedings play out.

    “The Eighth Circuit’s erroneous injunction leaves millions of economically vulnerable borrowers in limbo, uncertain about the size of their debt and unable to make financial decisions with an accurate understanding of their future repayment obligations,” Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said in the request sent to the court.

    Prelogar urged the court to accept the appeal, warning that a continuous hold on the program could cause borrowers’ uncertainty to extend into the next two years.

    Data shows that 43.4 million people face student loan debt. According to the Department of Education, 26 million people have submitted applications for Biden’s loan forgiveness program. In August, Biden announced the plan, which fulfilled a promise he made during his presidential campaign.

    The plan incited praise from thousands of people following its launch in October. But in the months leading up to the launch, criticism also ensued from Republicans who labeled the plan to be an unfair handout.

    Source link

  • Justice Department Defends Student Debt Relief Plan After Court Pauses Action

    Justice Department Defends Student Debt Relief Plan After Court Pauses Action

    The Justice Department on Monday defended the legality of President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, while a court weighs in on an effort by six Republican-led states to block the action.

    The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday temporarily blocked Biden’s plan while it considers an appeal from Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and South Carolina, which are challenging a district court’s ruling that threw out their case.

    The Justice Department wrote a brief to the court, arguing the lawsuit is “based on speculation about possible downstream economic effects” of the action, and called on the court to allow the administration to continue its work on the program in the meantime, according to CNN.

    The department added that Education Secretary Miguel Cardona was within his right to act invoke the 2003 Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act “to prevent pandemic-induced harm to lower-income student-loan borrowers.”

    The act, which was passed in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, allows the education secretary to alter student financial assistance programs in the event of “a war or other military operation or national emergency.”

    “Congress hardly could have expressed more clearly its intent to give the Secretary maximum flexibility to ensure borrowers are not worse off financially because of a national emergency,” the Justice Department added.

    The six states lost the original lawsuit, as U.S. District Judge Henry Edward Autrey ruled they had not demonstrated the plan would cause them direct harm.

    “The Court lacks jurisdiction to hear this case,” the judge said.

    The states had argued Biden’s plan is “not remotely tailored to address the effects of the pandemic on federal student loan borrowers,” as required under the 2003 law the administration used to justify the debt relief.

    Cardona on Saturday posted a video on Twitter, addressing the legal challenges the administration has faced and calling out Republicans who have taken issue with student loan forgiveness but benefited from debt forgiveness of the Paycheck Protection Program loans during the pandemic.

    “As you know, we faced more than half a dozen lawsuits, many from places that accepted PPP loan relief last year. But we’re not deterred. We’ll keep fighting for you and pushing through,” Cardona said.

    The White House on Monday said 22 million student borrowers had already applied for the relief as of Friday.

    White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre repeated that the court’s administrative stay order does not prevent people from continuing to apply for the program.

    “The order also does not reverse the lower court’s dismissal of the case or suggest that the case has any merit at all. It merely prevents debt from being discharged until the court makes a decision,” she said.

    Asked if Biden would consider re-extending the pause on student loan payments, which is set to expire in January, Jean-Pierre said she wouldn’t get drawn into hypothetical scenarios.

    “We’re just going to let the process play out,” she said.

    Under Biden’s plan, student borrowers making up to $125,000 would be eligible for $10,000 of relief. Pell Grant recipients could get up to $20,000.

    Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett on Thursday blocked an appeal by the Wisconsin-based Brown County Taxpayers Association which also sought to challenge the student debt relief program.

    Source link