Ahead of this year’s Senate election, The Daily Reveille sent a questionnaire to U.S. Senate candidates Charles Boustany, Foster Campbell, Caroline Fayard, John Kennedy, John Fleming and David Duke. The questionnaire included five questions relating to issues important to college students. The answers from those who responded are below.
1. What is your position on the proposed state constitutional amendment regarding tuition autonomy (Amendment 2) that will be decided on by voters Nov. 8?
U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany (R): “I support Amendment 2 because I support giving institutions of higher learning the autonomy to make decisions for themselves. I believe the institutions, and not the legislature, is the better choice to handle this issue. Supporting Amendment 2 takes the politics out of tuition pricing and is a better option for our students.”
Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell (D): ”If Bobby Jindal hadn’t cut higher education by 80 percent, and then raised tuition to make up the difference, this conversation about authority to raise tuition wouldn’t even be raised. Raising tuition is not, in and of itself, to fix what Bobby Jindal broke at higher education institutions around the state. And, while legislators are likely ready to pass the buck on this issue to avoid blame, that isn’t a solution either. We need to have fewer conversations about raising tuition and more about reinvesting in our campuses and our students regardless of the outcome on Amendment 2 this November.”
New Orleans Lawyer Caroline Fayard (D): “I support Amendment 2, because it will give universities the needed flexibility to fund degree programs in the face of drastic budget cuts. However, I believe that this amendment is only a temporary solution. Lawmakers must confront the systemic issues concerning the rise of student tuition and the spiraling costs of higher education. Part of that solution must be to incentivize states to increase their higher education funding for state universities.”
State Treasurer John Kennedy (R): “Ultimately, the people of Louisiana get to decide what is best, and I certainly won’t stand in the way of whatever the voters decide.”
2. What is your perspective on higher education funding in the state? What steps would you take on the federal level to preserve or improve higher education in Louisiana?
Boustany: “The state of Louisiana must stop slashing higher education. Put simply, the state is mortgaging our future to paper over the bad budgetary decisions made today by our state’s Chief Financial Officer. It’s wrong. Louisiana must continue to invest in our most important asset – our youth.
“While the majority of these decisions are made at the state level, at the federal level I will continue to support private options for student loans that will increase competition and lower cost. Additionally, I will push for more transparency in tuition pricing to ensure institutions of higher education are held accountable for the rising cost of tuition. “
Campbell: ”I will support legislation that incentives states to keep tuition low. At the federal level we need to work for more opportunities to match state spending with federal dollars. We should also link PELL grants to inflation so they cover more of college costs and expand loan forgiveness so that grads are held back by student debt. For parents looking to help kids make it, we have to address recent issues in the Parent Plus loan program that have prevented many parents from being able to borrow, even when they are financially prepared to repay loans.”
Fayard: “Because education spending is discretionary, it is often one of the first items to be taken out of the budget. That, however, is an irresponsible divestment from the state’s most valuable resource: its people. There are two problems here: there’s a funding problem and a debt problem. Since the Financial Crisis, states have cut funding to public education drastically. This needs to be reversed. The Federal Government is in a position to incentivize state investment in education through federal-state partnerships. Matching programs, like those that already exist, would encourage states to invest in higher education in order to receive more capital from the federal government.
“Expanding Pell Grants and indexing them to inflation would help bridge the gap in funding for students and universities as well. Strengthening Pell Grants would be an immediate boost for the 8.2 million families nationwide that use these grants to help pay for college. Finally, student debt must also be addressed. With national student debt reaching $1.4 trillion dollars, the loans our students are taking out is beginning to be a significant burden on our economy.
“Federal student loans cannot be refinanced. By allowing all student loans to be refinanced, an estimated 25 million students, including Louisianans, would save thousands of dollars. Furthermore, capping increases in loans from year-to-year will help rein in both student debt and the costs that higher education institutions charge for tuition.”
Kennedy: “Congress is ultimately responsible for setting the interest rates for federal student loans, and as Senator, I’ll work to keep them as low as possible for our college graduates.”
3. What is your position on the future of TOPS funding?
Boustany: “The state of Louisiana made a promise to students, and that promise should be kept. It’s disgraceful that the bad budgetary decisions made by our state’s chief financial officer are causing students to miss out on this program. The state of Louisiana must find alternative ways of finding savings — TOPS is not one of them.”
Campbell: ”TOPS is an essential program that must be fully funded. Since TOPS was tied 100 percent to tuition, when Bobby Jindal hurt higher education, he also made the costs of TOPS explode. Another reason to keep tuition low, is to make sure that our state can continue to fund TOPS. Bobby Jindal turned down federal money for high speed internet, high speed rail, pre-k education and medicaid expansion — all funds that would have displaced state dollars to fully fund TOPS. I am committed to working with our governor to bring our federal tax dollars home — to use in our state budget — so that we can fully fund TOPS and our other priorities.”
Fayard: “I believe that the divestment of TOPS funding is the wrong choice for Louisiana and that funding should be restored as quickly as possible. With funding for TOPS being slashed as unprecedented rates, it is more important than ever to implement policies that will ease the burden on our state universities and students.
“One way, which I will advocate for as US Senator, is by strengthening and expanding Federal Pell Grants. In Louisiana alone, well over 100,000 students use Pell Grants to fund their education and, as TOPS funding becomes more scarce, the demand for these grants will continue to rise. However, because Pell Grants aren’t tied to the inflation rate, their value has been diminishing as the cost of college has skyrocketed. Indexing Pell Grants to current inflation rates would give 9.2 million students nationally an additional $1,300 in grant funding to pay for college costs. Furthermore, expanding the value of Pell Grants would combat increased interest rates and provide a more solid foundation in helping the 8.2 million families nationwide that use these grants to help pay for college.
“Restoring the purchasing power of Pell Grants and strengthening our current Pell Grant system will help families across the nation in receiving larger awards, putting the dream of a college education within reach for more students.
Kennedy: “Fully fund it, period.”
4. LSU President F. King Alexander has said he is an advocate for state-federal partnerships to incentivize state investment in colleges. Would you support an initiative like this and why?
Boustany: “We need to adequately fund higher education and state-federal partnerships are an appropriate tool. I do not support mandates from Washington tying the hands of our educational leaders at the local level. Local leaders are the best equipped to manage these institutions and will be the most responsive to the needs of the community and its students. We have a responsibility to invest in our future.”
Campbell: ”I would support state-federal partnerships because they will encourage state investment in higher education and prevent further privatization of college. Since the 1970’s, the trend of shifting costs from the state to working families has been growing. In Louisiana, Jindal’s massive cuts to higher education led to massive tuition increases, punishing our families and keeping our kids out of our institutions. These kinds of partnerships are proven to work, and can help states like Louisiana balance our own state budgets by attracting new federal dollars for our top priorities like higher education.”
Fayard: “State-federal partnerships are essential to helping revitalize our national higher education systems. Because of cuts to higher education funding in state budgets, the federal government now funds universities in higher amounts than state governments. As a result, universities are forced to rely on tuition for 71 percent of their revenue.
“Creating a federal-state match program, like those that already exist for health care and infrastructure, would incentivize state spending for higher education and strengthen education in Louisiana as well as nationwide. We cannot lose perspective: investment in education is an investment in our future, benefiting everyone by increasing scientific research, creating good paying jobs, and giving our citizens the tools to succeed in the 21st Century economy.”
Kennedy: “It depends on the details of the initiative but, generally, yes.”
5. Polls show Hillary Clinton leading in electoral college votes, and there is a strong possibility Democrats will retake the Senate this year. How will you practice bipartisanship while representing the interests of a predominantly Republican state?
Boustany: “As Southwest Louisiana’s Congressman, I have a reputation as the conservative who gets results for a reason. On areas where we’ve found common ground, I’ve been able to work with Presidents of both parties on disaster relief and coastal restoration, for example. But I’m not afraid to stand up for Louisiana, either – securing two new veterans’ clinics for Lafayette and Lake Charles and stopping new taxes on the oil & gas industry against President Obama’s wishes.”
Campbell: ”Specifically, my forty year record of serving our people shows that I can put into practice the bipartisanship that others just talk about. Neither the republican party or the democratic party has a monopoly on good ideas or good people. I have always represented my constituents, not special interests. In the Senate I won’t serve a political party, a single industry or viewpoint. Our people are diverse and our needs are vast. I will do what I’ve done all my life. I find ways to help others deliver what they need to their constituents so that I can ask them to do the same for mine. Cooperation breeds cooperation.”
Fayard: “I was born and raised in Denham Springs. Louisiana’s values are my values. Regardless of political party, I am dedicated to working on solutions to improve the livelihoods of all Louisianans, not just Democrats or Republicans. This means working across the aisle to ensure that the proper bills are passed to help make Louisiana’s future brighter. Issues should not be looked at based on political ideology or partisan affiliation, but based on the direct effects and implications of each issue and policy.
“My time in the Senate will be spent on ensuring that our hard-working families can succeed in making a better life for themselves. Folks here are tired of partisan gridlock, and it is my mission to make sure those days are put behind us. I am focused on Louisiana’s future.”
Kennedy: “I’m willing to work with anybody, but I will not compromise my principles in doing so. “
Editor’s Note: The questionnaire was sent to the six candidates who qualified for the most recent Senate debate. The Daily Reveille reached out to Republican candidate and former state representative David Duke but did not received a response to the questionnaire at the time of publication.
U.S. Rep. John Fleming’s campaign declined to respond, and The Daily Reveille received the following response from his campaign communication director Matt Beynon: “Your questions are focused on state issues that the United States Senate has very little influence over. Because Congressman Fleming is running for federal office and not state office, we believe the responses to the questions posed are better provided by members of the State Legislature and Governor’s office.”
