Student financial aid should not go to for-pofit colleges

Before I begin, let me clarify a definition: According to the United States Department of Education: "Private schools are not affiliated with a government organization. They may be nonprofit colleges, such as those run by private foundations or religious denominations. Or, they may be for-profit businesses, such as many career, online, or technical schools. " [1] This debate focuses on whether private, for-profit colleges should receive student aid from the Federal Gov't. Now, here are my arguments against the resolution: 1. For-profit colleges have a record of being fraudulent and/or misleading. One report by the Government Accountability Office in 2010 found that: "Undercover tests at 15 for-profit colleges found that 4 colleges encouraged fraudulent practices and that all 15 made deceptive or otherwise questionable statements to GAO's undercover applicants. Four undercover applicants were encouraged by college personnel to falsify their financial aid forms to qualify for federal aid--for example, one admissions representative told an applicant to fraudulently remove $250,000 in savings. Other college representatives exaggerated undercover applicants' potential salary after graduation and failed to provide clear information about the college's program duration, costs, or graduation rate despite federal regulations requiring them to do so. " [2] These explicit and implicit deceptions matter because, according to the same source: "Enrollment in for-profit colleges has grown from about 365,000 students to almost 1.8 million in the last several years. These colleges offer degrees and certifications in programs ranging from business administration to cosmetology. In 2009, students at for-profit colleges received more than $4 billion in Pell Grants and more than $20 billion in federal loans provided by the Department of Education (Education). [3] In general, this report highlights a disturbing trend among for-profit colleges to be dishonest. Since the colleges accept federal student aid under the condition of following certain regulatory practices, the failure to meet those requirements necessitates the removal of said aid. 2. For-profit colleges charge notoriously high tuitions. Almost as if they were cows, for-profit colleges milk their students' bank accounts dry. Some charge upwards of 20,000 each year on top of student aid and student loans. [4] Political leaders, especially Democrats, tend to agree that for-profit colleges charge too much for what they actually deliver on. [5] This problem has persisted in recent years. [6] Here's two more excellent sources on the matter: [7] [8] 3. For-profit colleges graduation rates are appallingly low. For four-year for-profit colleges, their graduation rates are abysmal. Yet, their two-year counterparts tend to have better rates. [9] Either way, this is not an enterprise which the federal government should fund when their own public colleges and universities are struggling under increased student enrollment and crippling budget cuts. [10] [11] Conclusion: There are better alternatives to the federal government funding overwhelmingly greedy, overpromising, and under-delivering for-profit colleges. One option would be to redirect the wasted money to subsidizing its own schools. Given my three arguments against the resolution, I wish Pro the very best of luck in defending the status quo. I look forward to Pro's response. Sources: [1]. https://studentaid.ed.gov... [2]. http://www.gao.gov... [3]. http://www.gao.gov... [4]. http://www.mercurynews.com... [5]. http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [6]. http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com... [7]. http://www.nacacnet.org... [8]. http://www.marketwatch.com... [9]. http://collegecompletion.chronicle.com... [10]. http://trends.collegeboard.org... [11]. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...