So, basically, if you reverse the process and say, 'We'll tell you earlier how much money you can get, and then you can pick the college,' ....
Well, we have 9 million Pell grants, so that's 2 million or 3 million students. Is that right?
I think we've perpetuated this fiction that you can't afford to go to college when, in fact, you can.
So then why do you need this?
But most people who are eligible for a Pell grant end up getting the whole amount, don't they?
Would you agree that while it has been an attempt to stimulate the economy, the more well off have benefited much better than those at the l...
I think one of the things that we discussed was my concern--and I think yours, too--that in many ways easy money is an elitist policy.
The American spirit is the can-do, we can fix it attitude, not the blame game, not the bickering game.
if you need more time to brag on Tennessee, you are welcome to take it.
I think one great way to lessen costs for college students and taxpayers is to graduate students in as timely a manner as possible.
A problem that we have seen evolving over the past couple decades is the amount of time it takes for students to complete college degrees.
I am worried that the net effect of this hearing might be to exaggerate the security difficulties of the website.
So why is additional legislation necessary for an industry that is over 98 percent compliant?
I think that we all agree that the soring of horses in any form is objectionable on every level, and for good reason.
I have information that it is, and of course, the Thoroughbred industry has had over 3,000 horses die in the last 4 years.
There are plenty of things that we do that are less important than this, if we want to keep a high standard of living.
But this proposal from the administration is not without merit.
The sequester is the long-term enemy. It's inexorable unless it gets eliminated.
