House Republicans’ 2025 Budget Proposal Slashes Funding For FSA Administration, Campus-Based Aid Programs
By Maria Carrasco, NASFAA Staff Reporter
House Republicans on Wednesday released their education funding proposal for fiscal year 2025, cutting funding for the Federal Work-Study (FWS) and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG) programs in half, and slashing funding for Federal Student Aid (FSA) administration by 26%.
The bill, which would impact the 2025-26 award year, contains an overall request of $72 billion for the Department of Education (ED), a decrease of $10 billion below the 2025 request made from the Biden administration, and a 13% decrease with 2024 levels. In March, the Biden administration proposed $82 billion in federal discretionary spending for ED in 2025.
However, according to the Committee for Education Funding (CEF), the funding proposed for ED actually totals $68.1 billion — not $72 billion — when accounting for rescissions of previously enacted funds that were included in the bill. That means the House GOP proposal actually cuts ED funding by $11 billion, or 14%. CEF also estimates that the funding for fiscal year 2025 included in this proposal is almost $28 billion below 2011 funding levels in inflation-adjusted terms.
Additionally, the House GOP’s proposal would allot $23.5 billion for the federal student aid programs, a decrease of $1.1 billion below the 2024 level and $3.2 billion below the Biden administration’s 2025 request. Of that amount, $22.5 billion would be allotted for the federal Pell Grant program, which is equal to the 2024 level, and $2.1 billion below the Biden administration’s 2025 request. The maximum Pell Grant award for the 2025-26 year would remain unchanged from 2024-25, at $7,395.
ED would receive about $1.5 billion to administer student aid programs, a 26% cut from FY 2024, whereas the Biden administration requested $2.7 billion.
The FSEOG program would be funded at $455 million, about half of the 2024 level and the Biden administration's 2025 request. Likewise, funding for FWS would also be cut in half, at $615 million.
NASFAA Vice President of Public Policy & Federal Relations Karen McCarthy said that while NASFAA appreciates bipartisan commitment to preserving both the Pell Grant program and the program’s reserve fund, cuts to FSA and the campus-based aid programs will disproportionately impact many low-income students.
“Cutting funding for programs that provide financial assistance to students pursuing a postsecondary education is short-sighted and will only harm our nation in the long-run,” McCarthy said. “Certainly, curbing funding for the very programs that in many cases make all the difference for financially needy students is not the way to encourage talented students to pursue a postsecondary degree or credential.”
Further, the bill includes language which would prohibit ED from using funding to administer its income-driven repayment plan, the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) plan, where earlier this week a pair of federal judges issued separate injunctions that have blocked ED from fully implementing. Additionally, the bill includes language that would block ED from using funds to administer borrower defense and gainful employment regulations.
As for other higher education programs, this bill would allot $1.2 billion for Federal TRIO programs, which is equal to the 2024 level and $20 million below the 2025 request. And $388 million would be allotted for GEAR UP, which is equal to the 2024 level and $10 million below the 2025 request.
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), who chairs the Labor-H appropriations subcommittee, said in a statement that this budget proposal reins in “reckless and wasteful spending.”
“This bill focuses on ensuring the success of critical programs that affect every American, through supporting our nation’s workforce, increasing access to healthcare for those in underserved and rural areas, and prioritizing targeted education programs, all while cutting politically motivated initiatives pushed by unelected bureaucrats,” Aderholt said.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the full appropriations committee, criticized the House Republicans’ budget proposal, calling it “dangerous” and threatening to “programs and services that Americans depend on at every stage of their life.”
The Labor-H Appropriations Subcommittee is expected to review the bill on Thursday. Stay tuned to Today’s News for more updates on the appropriations process.
Publication Date: 6/26/2024
Tiauna R | 6/27/2024 4:20:37 PM
I think that work-study is important, but the funding towards tuition and fees are even more so. Students do not mind working if it's going to help them with their expenses. I say to give students the option to have their funds pay directly towards their tuition or be direct deposited into their accounts. Change Work-study and FSEOG's name (combine them) so that they can have the best of both worlds- options.
Vincent F | 6/27/2024 10:51:48 AM
To be honest, I'd rather just eliminate FWS, and keep FSEOG. Our funding levels for both are so ridiculously small, the overwhelming majority of our student employees are paid directly out of individual departments' budgets. FWS is more trouble than it's worth.
Eileen E | 6/27/2024 10:42:50 AM
I know FSEOG is important. I prefer to drop FSEOG before cutting workstudy funding. The US needs to invest in worker learners for the labor force. A worker learner is getting transferable work skills by working on campus. The government is getting a better return value by supporting work-study.
Per Gallup.com, Less than half of college graduates succeed in finding purposeful work and only 11 percent of business leaders strongly agreed that college graduates have the skills employers need. These are reason why government should invest in work-study.
You must be logged in to comment on this page.