Editorial: Examining Obama’s free community college proposal

Free things are great, right? Well, at least, they seem so at face value.

President Obama’s recently announced “America’s College Promise” proposes two free years of community college for American students. It appears to be a step in the right direction of realizing greater higher education opportunities. The plan is based off of the “Tennessee Promise,” a state scholarship program, which begins this fall. The program guarantees free tuition to Tennessee community and technical colleges. But before the public gives the plan too much praise, we must explore both the positive and negative aspects of it.

We’ll start with the bad news. Although the program is free to students, someone still has to front the bill. According to The Christian Science Monitor, “America’s College Promise” is estimated to cost the federal government $60 billion over 10 years. Is it worth the cost?

Although more education sounds exciting to those who value the importance of learning, will the federal government spending billions of dollars on this program really equate to more job opportunities for students? 

Additionally, should the federal government play such a large role in post-secondary education, or should those choices be reserved mostly for the states? 

There are no simple answers to these questions. However, when considering the President’s proposal, students and citizens should not ignore these questions, but they should discuss them in more detail than possible here.

That aside, there are certainly positives to the initiative. Many studies have confirmed that higher levels of education correlate with higher levels of economic earnings. Many students from poor or working class families do not have the means to obtain a high level of education. With “America’s College Promise,” participating colleges would offer academic programs that fully transfer to four-year colleges or job training programs. 

Governments cannot and should not strive for equal results in any field, including education. That is not in accord with our individualistic society. However, governments should always work to provide equal opportunity to students and citizens so that they have a chance at success. If the government, whether at state or federal level, can offer students better access to higher levels of education, which is the goal here, the American public should strive to make the idea a reality.

But the program should not stop at community colleges. Today, jobs requiring trained, vocational skills remain essential to society. If the federal government invests significant money in educational opportunity and wants a practical return on such an investment, it should create more scholarships for low to middle income students to learn a trade needed in the job market, such as welding. That way, money spent on education directly leads to employment and, therefore, to economic growth.

President Obama’s proposal sounds great, and perhaps it will turn out to be. But we cannot ignore the financial realities of such programs or whether or not the federal government can effectively execute its promises. Nonetheless, we should not forget the positive aims of the program. With caution and ongoing scrutiny, Americans should work together to provide higher education and skills training to all Americans, regardless of socioeconomic background.