“Higher education is a strategic investment in our nation’s future. Education should be a right, not a privilege. We need a revolution in the way that the United States funds higher education.” - Sen. Bernie Sanders at a rally by college students outside the U.S. Capitol on March 27
As a university student, I find the topic of college tuition a particularly pressing issue in this presidential race. Although there is a lot to be said about the conflicting views from both sides, as I mentioned in my last post, I am inclined to focus on the Democratic candidates. Sanders and Clinton have approached this subject differently. Clinton states that public colleges and universities will be debt-free if students are willing to work at least 10 hours a week. In contrast, Sanders supports tuition-free college for all students, regardless of their socioeconomic status. During the CNN debate, he stated that he will “pay for [this] program through a tax on Wall Street speculation, which will not only make colleges and universities tuition-free, it will substantially lower college debt.”
Admittedly, I am not qualified to analyze how effective their policies would be in practice. Therefore, I am more interested in considering why these are the views they’re promoting. Yet again it seems as though Sanders is motivated predominantly by a sense of morality for future generations, stating that “education should be a right, not a privilege.” He is undeniably correct that a high school education is simply not enough anymore to be qualified and hired for high-paying jobs. Furthermore, tuition prices for many universities and colleges are absurdly high. However, if the money goes toward improving education, I think perhaps those who can afford it should have to pay a “reasonable” tuition. Nevertheless, I support the moral standpoint from which Sanders approaches this topic and many others.
-Sam














