Battles Over State Spending and Black Colleges Slow Higher-Ed Bill

By Kelly Field
The Chronical of Higher Education July 24, 2008

By KELLY FIELD

 

With just over a week remaining until the August recess, members of Congress and their aides are scrambling to complete work on a long-delayed bill to reauthorize the Higher Education Act.

Negotiations are now centered on just two issues: Should states be penalized for cutting their higher-education budgets? And should Congress create one new program for black colleges, or two?

Time is of the essence. After lawmakers return from the monthlong August recess, they will have only a few weeks of floor time before they head home again, this time to campaign for the November elections. If a compromise bill doesn't clear Congress in that narrow window, the legislation will have to wait until next year, when Congress will have to start the lengthly reauthorization process all over again under a new president.

The fight over state spending is relatively straightforward, pitting a Massachusetts congressman against a Tennessee senator. On one side is Rep. John F. Tierney, the Democratic sponsor of a provision in the House-passed bill that would withhold certain federal matching funds from states that reduce their own higher-education appropriations. On the other is Sen. Lamar Alexander, a former college president and governor.

Mr. Alexander, a Republican, blames rising Medicaid costs for state higher-education cuts and says adding more federal mandates on states isn't the solution. He has threatened to block the naming of members to a formal conference on the bill if the so-called "maintenance of effort" language is included in the compromise bill.

David P. Cleary, staff director for Mr. Alexander, says it is now up to Mr. Tierney to decide whether he's willing to leave out the language and offer it as an amendment during conference or floor debate. Mr. Tierney's spokeswoman declined to comment on the showdown, saying "matters are still under negotiation."

Money for HBCU's at Stake

The second fight is more nuanced—and more parochial. At issue is whether a new grant program for master's-degree programs at historically black colleges and universities should be open to predominantly black institutions and whether it should be located in Title III of the bill—with the other programs for HBCU's—or in Title VII, where new programs generally go. The "predominantly black" designation, which was created in last year's budget-reconciliation bill, applies to institutions with student enrollments that are at least 40 percent black.

With millions of dollars in play, those seemingly superficial distinctions have become a major sticking point in negotiations, which have dragged on for months.

Kimrey Rhinehardt, vice president for federal relations for the University of North Carolina system, argues that HBCU's, with their roots in racial segregation, belong in a different category from predominantly black institutions, which serve large percentages of black students, but were founded after the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision led to racial desegregation in public education. While HBCU's were explicitly created to serve black Americans, predominantly black institutions were not.

"Their missions and histories are too different to be in the same pot," she says, arguing that there should be two separate programs: one for HBCU's, another for the predominantly black institutions, which are known as "PBI's."

The University of North Carolina, which has the support of Sen. Richard M. Burr, Republican of North Carolina, is also looking out for its own. The system has three HBCU's that could benefit from a new master's-degree program—Elizabeth City State University, Fayetteville State University, and Winston-Salem State University—but no predominantly black institutions. If predominantly black institutions are added to the mix, that would dilute the amount of money available to HBCU's, particularly if Congress goes along with the president's plan to cut the colleges' discretionary budget.

"We've got a lot at stake," she says. "A million dollars to a school like Fayetteville—that's a big deal."

But members of the Congressional Black Caucus reportedly want a single, shared program. (The caucus and several of its members declined to comment or did not return calls for this article.) Caucus members argue that only a few predominantly black institutions would qualify for the program anyway—largely because many lack master's-degree programs—and worry that the institutions would suffer in the federal appropriations process if left on their own. Combining the two categories of schools would give predominantly black institutions more clout and a better shot at federal financing.

A separate, smaller debate is occurring over where in the bill to place the master's-degree program, or programs. Senator Burr says they belong in Title III, with the other HBCU programs. Locating the grants there would increase the chances that the new program gets federal money and would ensure that recipients could use the award for a variety of purposes, including equipment and capacity building. But the House, which created the new program in its version of the reauthorization bill, put it in Title VII, and specified that the money would be used for graduate fellowships.

For now, it appears that the program will remain in Title VII. But that could easily change. As Congressional spokesmen contacted for this article repeatedly said, "everything is in flux" and "nothing is final." One aide said members of the Congressional Black Caucus were expected to meet with Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski—the Maryland Democrat who is leading the negotiations in the absence of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts—on Wednesday to discuss a compromise that could end the deadlock.

Ms. Rhinehardt said the university is willing to yield on the program's placement, but is "holding firm" on usage. She says it is critical that institutions be allowed to decide how to spend their money.

Meanwhile, the debate over state spending is taking a back seat, Mr. Cleary said.

"It's been cast into the shadows of the spotlight on HBCU's," he said.