As a result of a proposed revision to the 1965 Higher Education Act, the Bush Administration could shift the approximately $1.7 billion in federal aid which it distributes to colleges and universities across the nation from more-established schools in the Northeast, to schools in the southern and western parts of the country. The debate over reallocation of aid could extend into next year.

As Congress prepares to renew the Higher Education Act this year, many college lobbyists for southern and western schools have pressured the government to adjust this formula for allocation. Both the California state university system, the largest senior higher-education system in the country, and the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, are lobbying for a change in the way aid is distributed. They assert that the current distribution formula favors older, elite private colleges in the Northeast and the Midwest, and short-changes fast-growing, low-cost colleges in the South and the West, many of which contain a large percentage of minority students.

The Higher Education Act was created in 1965 in an attempt to facilitate higher education by providing financial aid such as Pell Grants, PLUS loans, Work-Study programs, Perkins Loans and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.

Currently, the federal government provides all colleges in the United States with the same share of aid, regardless of the percentage of low-income students who attend a school. This type of assistance is known as a “base guarantee.” After this base amount is distributed, the remaining funds are allocated to universities on a “fair share basis.”

According to an article published last month in the Boston Globe, the three campus-aid programs which would be affected by this revision are the Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOGs), low-interest rate Perkins Loans, and Work-Study jobs.

According to the Education Department, the state of assachusetts, which has 80 private two- and four-year colleges, received $80 million in campus-based aid for the 2002-03 academic year. Only New York, California and Texas received more. In comparison, many states with colleges whose enrollments are predicted to climb rapidly over the next decade, received less. Florida received $71 million, Arizona received $24 million, New exico received $11.5 million and Nevada received $4 million.

The allocation to individual colleges reflects the regional disparity even more. This year, Harvard, Northeastern and Boston University each received $7 million in campus-based aid. MIT and Boston College received about $4 million each. California State University at Monterey Bay, a 10-year-old campus with 3,700 students – many of them minorities and 60 percent first generation in higher education – received $250,000. The University of Nevada at Las Vegas, a school with 26,000 students and an enrollment rate of 5 percent a year, received $1.2 million.

Instead of redistributing money to correct this disparity, Fleming argues that Congress should increase aid to all institutions in the country.

“The fact of the matter is that there is a tremendous need for student financial aid all across the country, and that need has been increasing in recent years,” Fleming said. “However, Congress has held funding basically constant for these programs over the last three years. Over 1,100 colleges and universities around the country saw their Federal Work-Study budgets cut for the current academic year from the year before. That says to me that it is very important that resources for these campus-based programs need to be ramped up so that students who qualify for these programs all across the country can truly benefit.” If the Act were revised to eliminate the base guarantee, two-year community colleges and for-profit technical and professional schools would gain the most, and private and public four-year institutions would lose millions of dollars in campus-based aid.

As a result of a proposed revision to the 1965 Higher Education Act, the Bush Administration could shift the approximately $1.7 billion in federal aid which it distributes to colleges and universities across the nation from more-established schools in the Northeast, to schools in the southern and western parts of the country. The debate over reallocation of aid could extend into next year.

As Congress prepares to renew the Higher Education Act this year, many college lobbyists for southern and western schools have pressured the government to adjust this formula for allocation. Both the California state university system, the largest senior higher-education system in the country, and the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, are lobbying for a change in the way aid is distributed. They assert that the current distribution formula favors older, elite private colleges in the Northeast and the Midwest, and short-changes fast-growing, low-cost colleges in the South and the West, many of which contain a large percentage of minority students.

The Higher Education Act was created in 1965 in an attempt to facilitate higher education by providing financial aid such as Pell Grants, PLUS loans, Work-Study programs, Perkins Loans and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.

Currently, the federal government provides all colleges in the United States with the same share of aid, regardless of the percentage of low-income students who attend a school. This type of assistance is known as a “base guarantee.” After this base amount is distributed, the remaining funds are allocated to universities on a “fair share basis.”

According to an article published last month in the Boston Globe, the three campus-aid programs which would be affected by this revision are the Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOGs), low-interest rate Perkins Loans, and Work-Study jobs.

According to the Education Department, the state of assachusetts, which has 80 private two- and four-year colleges, received $80 million in campus-based aid for the 2002-03 academic year. Only New York, California and Texas received more. In comparison, many states with colleges whose enrollments are predicted to climb rapidly over the next decade, received less. Florida received $71 million, Arizona received $24 million, New exico received $11.5 million and Nevada received $4 million.

The allocation to individual colleges reflects the regional disparity even more. This year, Harvard, Northeastern and Boston University each received $7 million in campus-based aid. MIT and Boston College received about $4 million each. California State University at Monterey Bay, a 10-year-old campus with 3,700 students – many of them minorities and 60 percent first generation in higher education – received $250,000. The University of Nevada at Las Vegas, a school with 26,000 students and an enrollment rate of 5 percent a year, received $1.2 million.

Instead of redistributing money to correct this disparity, Fleming argues that Congress should increase aid to all institutions in the country.

“The fact of the matter is that there is a tremendous need for student financial aid all across the country, and that need has been increasing in recent years,” Fleming said. “However, Congress has held funding basically constant for these programs over the last three years. Over 1,100 colleges and universities around the country saw their Federal Work-Study budgets cut for the current academic year from the year before. That says to me that it is very important that resources for these campus-based programs need to be ramped up so that students who qualify for these programs all across the country can truly benefit.” If the Act were revised to eliminate the base guarantee, two-year community colleges and for-profit technical and professional schools would gain the most, and private and public four-year institutions would lose millions of dollars in campus-based aid.