<p>Some reforms have gone through, but despite the agreements with the NYS AG to cease and desist several companies are still doing improper promotions on campuses. </p>
<h2>So there have been some reforms but scarcely lots…</h2>
<h2>And yes SMC and NNC are prime offenders, the reason they matter so much is because of their lobby influence. Until recently policies were being set as a direct result of their agendas and influence. As an example they’ve kept many smaller companies who might provide better service and rates to students out of the arena. </h2>
<h2>And that influence continues, in this weeks “Chronicle” Paul Baskin has noted that the non profit lenders were largely left out of the recent cash inflow/bailout intended to ‘save’ student loans. So its more a matter of the influence of such as SMC and NNC eviscerating any competition in ‘their industry’. Competition which includes the non profit student lenders. </h2>
<p>And the lobby party continues…And as Ben Miller notes in the June 11th 2008 higher education watch, and was noted thereafter in the June 28th National Student News Service-the controlling companies are quite busy strategically placing their people into the NASFAA (National Association of Financial Aid Administrators) state chapters. By that move they’ve essentially ensured their influence over supposedly independent decisions. By controlling this group they’ll have undue influence over institutional financial aid officers.
[Student</a> Lenders and Financial Aid Lobbyists ? Friends or Foes? - National Student News Service](<a href=“http://nsns.org/news/student-lenders-and-financial-aid-lobbyists--friends-or-foes]Student”>http://nsns.org/news/student-lenders-and-financial-aid-lobbyists--friends-or-foes)</p>
<p>Student Lenders and Financial Aid Lobbyists Friends or Foes?
6/25/2008</p>
<p>Since 2003, concerns have circulated about the close ties between the student loan industry and the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA), an organization that lobbies on behalf of college aid officials. Suspicions rose as NASFAAs policy positions often fell directly in line with big student lenders like Sallie Mae and intensified last summer in the wake of the student loan scandal that found some schools financial aid offices colluding with lenders to the detriment of students. NASFAA, while denying that lenders have sway over policy, recently agreed to take steps to sever ties with the student loan industry including ending lender sponsorships of social events and lender meetings at the associations annual conference moves that will cost them tens of thousands of dollars. A recent study conducted by the New America Foundation, however, found that while NASFAA has policy of prohibiting loan industry officials from serving on its national board, the rule that does not apply to the organization’s state affiliates and regional associations which depend heavily on student loan providers for both leadership and financing. The study found that 19% of the individuals serving leadership positions were members of the loan industry during the 2007-08 academic year.</p>
<h2>[Higher</a> Ed Watch Investigation: Student Loan Companies Infiltrate College Financial Aid Associations | New America Blogs](<a href=“http://www.newamerica.net/blog/higher-ed-watch/2008/nasfaa-state-affiliates-4488]Higher”>http://www.newamerica.net/blog/higher-ed-watch/2008/nasfaa-state-affiliates-4488)</h2>
<p>As far as certain online schools and private loan companies targeting minorities, yes they are. The students I referred to are Native Americans who have just relocated off the reservation. It’s very improbable that these offers were simply sent blind. </p>
<h2>So yes they can just toss them, but the mere fact that these schools and companies are preying on particular populations is disturbing. And since certain populations may assume that these are governmental programs it is a form of misleading advertising. And it is a common practices for these companies to imply they are indeed governmental. </h2>
<p>And no I was not indirectly implying that the 544 billion is all in jeopardy…the posting of that number is to show how much money and influence are at stake regarding student loan policy and agendas. </p>
<p>This type of money indicates how much potential control this industry has over the economic life of the US. And demonstrates how the US has potentially created an economic liability in its educational funding policies. </p>
<p>544 some billion put into the consumer economy or into personal investments would do much more for the country as a whole than 544 billion residing in loan company corporate coffers. That money has been and will largely be directed to speculation and over expansion of these same controlling interests. BC Eagle for example has posted some very useful information that these companies are massively over leveraged. </p>
<h2> This potential loss of general economic potential could be why Australia, Germany, Ireland etc do not model their higher education funding on the US model.</h2>
<p>However this thread is diverging from the original concerns about the increases in students seeking aid…so perhaps others will chime in an take this
in another direction…</p>